All right, good afternoon.

Welcome back.

We're here at our special call finance audit and budget committee chaired by myself, Commissioner Ted Terry, joined by committee members commission Commissioner Michelle Long Spears and Commissioner Shakira Johnson, as well as our COO Zach Williams and County Attorney Terry Phillips.

Thank you all for joining us.

But if they do, just you know, wave over and let me know if they're if they're online.

So commissioners, the goal here for the special call meeting is to address any items that uh could be acted on that are on the agenda for tomorrow for action by the BOC.

Um so let's actually let's do our minutes first and then we'll jump into the agenda item.

So this is the uh 2026 1111 agenda item, meeting minutes for the uh July 6th, the last special call meeting of the finance audit budget committee.

So if there's no edits or changes, I'll open the floor for a motion.

So move.

Approved.

All right, motion a second, seeing no further discussion.

All in favor, and say aye.

Aye.

Chair vote side, motion carries.

All right, so let's go to the first one.

This is item 2026-1043.

All commission districts, a resolution approving the issuance of the housing authority, quote housing authority of the county of DeCAB, Georgia, taxable revenue bonds, also known as the housing investment bond program series 2026, and the aggregate principal amount not to exceed 25 million for the purpose of funding the housing investment bond program and authorizing the execution and delivery of an intergovernmental housing cooperation agreement between the county and the housing authority of the county of DeCab, Georgia.

Um I see uh Director Dr.

Ferguson is here.

Thank you for joining us.

Would you like to kick it off or Zach?

Do you want to do any preface before Dr.

Ferguson starts?

No, Mr.

Chair, I think Dr.

Ferguson's done a masterful job over the past number of months.

So I'd like him to go on and move on.

Okay, wonderful.

All right, let's hear it.

Well, um, the one thing that I would offer is that the additional item uh 2026-1044 uh is a companion piece, you know, regarding the programs.

Okay.

And so um I don't know if you wanted to kind of go into those two.

Yeah, let me just I'll read that and so we can talk about both in the same uh comments.

So uh the other item for consideration today is 2026-1044, a resolution authorizing the initial implementation of the DeCab County Housing Investment Bond Program by approving the creation and implementation of the multifamily acquisition fund, decab housing catalyst multi-gap financing program, deCAP Home Start Down Payment Assistance Program, DeCab Brighter Home Owner Occupied Rehabilitation Program, Revived DeCAB Multifamily Bright Blight Redevelopment Program, the Transitional Housing and Homelessness Program, and the Housing Capacity Seed Fund Program, collectively the HIB initial initial programs.

The resolution further approves the initial allocation of affordable housing fund resources to support these initiatives, authorizes delegated approval authority where applicable to the primary program administrator and designated sub-program administrators for the administration and project approvals consistent with adopted guidelines regarding the HIB initial programs and authorizes initial expenditures from the housing affordable fund to support operational capacity, systems development, technical services, legal services, advisory services, and homelessness services necessary to advance affordable housing production, preservation, neighborhood stabilization, and homelessness response efforts through DeCab County.

Did I say it all?

Yeah, that's it.

I covered it.

All right, Dr.

Ferguson.

All right, thank you.

And uh, you know, thank you, committee, for you know, allowing me the opportunity, you know, to present on this again.

And so um, you know, I've shared, you know, essentially our goals of the housing investment uh bond program.

Um ultimately what we're going to achieve is 155 million dollars uh generated in uh bond proceeds.

It's a drawdown bond structure, so we're not issuing all 155 million dollars at once.

This initial issuance uh is for 25 million dollars.

And as we monitor pipeline and build up activity, we'll be circling back for a subsequent uh bond issuance under the drawdown structure.

Uh that does a couple of different things, but most importantly, what it does is allow us to uh reduce our interest and carrying costs during the interim while we work on development pipeline uh to get this uh you know these programs launched and get the capital deployed.

Uh so we're proposing, you know, as item 1044, you know, outlines a number of different programs uh you know that I've shared uh you know with every you know when here on you know multiple uh you know occasions and so really the approval uh that we're requesting is for approval of the two items 1043, which covers the intergovernmental agreement um and authority to for the bond issuance uh in partnership uh with the housing authority of the CAD County and uh the approval to launch the initial programs and activities supported by the housing investment bond that uh long list of items uh the chair of the committee so uh eloquent get captured in that cap in that so uh if you have any any uh additional questions, yeah, I'm more than happy to uh you know to you know answer them and uh and address any of your immediate concerns.

Um if you'd like me to go through the entire presentation again, you know, that's you know fine as well.

Um we're seeking your approval.

If we can, since we have all of the agreements, exhibits, like it's all in the paperwork here.

Let's um have the commissioners ask any specific questions about you know the actual thing we're voting on.

Um I think we've covered the high level, but um I'll open the floor up for any commissioner comments questions.

Sure.

Commissioner Johnson.

Sure.

I just had a a brief one, and I think I've asked this before, but I'm not remembering the answer.

Um when would the programs be launched?

Yeah, it's so it's all about timing and when we can uh pull everything together.

Our goal is to at least get some of the programs launched by the end of third quarter of 2026 with the remainder launching during fourth quarter of 2026.

Um, but uh again it just all depends upon you know procurement processes, making sure that we find some adequate vendors for some of the activities, which we think we'll be able to do.

Um, but you know, I can't emphasize enough that you know time isn't our friend uh on this.

Uh you know, I sent a communication out to uh the Board of Commissioners previously uh that we're dealing with the window uh of opportunity, and if we've missed that window, we're essentially looking at anywhere from a 60 to 90 day delay.

Um, and if we experience that delay, then the opportunity for us to launch any programs this year, this calendar year is gonna get pushed back uh probably into 2027.

And then with us potentially approving this tomorrow, we would be within the window to get something launched in 2026.

Yes, absolutely.

You know, I can't emphasize enough, you know, the whole team that you know we've assembled in terms of you know our programming administrator with this, which is the housing authority to Cav County, as well as all of the sub program administrators are ready uh and uh ready to move forward, you know, with this uh approval.

And it'll follow a dual track.

There'll be, you know, one track of exercises that will move towards bond closing and simultaneously uh everyone will be working on application development, you know, putting out those vendors to get you know the qualified contractors and consultants in place and preparing uh all of our systems and processes for for program launch.

Perfect.

Thank you.

I yield.

All right, thank you, Commissioner Johnson.

Commissioner Long Spears.

Thank you very much.

Um as always appreciate you, Dr.

Ferguson.

And I am um was delighted that you brought this potential program to the county.

And it was a way of leveraging the affordable housing fund to help us address and hopefully solve some of our housing and unhoused challenges.

Um the first question I have for you relates to the term.

And so is it is it 40 years?

Is that correct?

Like overall, that's what you're you're hoping for?

Yeah, we we looked at a variety of different uh scenarios and uh Bob Atkins uh is here who's been you know kind of really helping you know quarterback that process uh for us with the finance team.

And so I want to say we looked at 30, 35, and 40 year options.

And so when you're looking about the annual carry on debt service, obviously the 40-year option you know reduces uh that amount of carry.

But uh what I will say how these types of transactions have typically worked in the past uh is that you know, as the interest rate uh and the market you know environment changes, there'll be opportunities for us to kind of you know refinance you know that debt to give even more savings uh from a capital market standpoint and also generate some interim additional proceeds again that we can redeploy uh for programming going forward.

And so is the um gold in at the 27.5 million dollars for 40 years annually, correct?

I'm sorry?

27.5 million annually for 40 years?

No.

In terms of the total amount of debt service?

The total amount, yes, for investment.

No, total amount of the total amount of debt service once we ramp up to 155 million dollars, it's roughly going to be about 10 million dollars, just shy of 10 million dollars a year based on our uh projections.

After this year, is that correct?

Yeah, after this.

If I'm reading the um page three of the resolution correctly.

So we won't we won't have 155 million dollars outstanding tomorrow.

I mean, next you know, next year.

It's probably gonna take us a good two years, you know, to get to 155 million dollars outstanding.

Um, and that's assuming everything works in sync, you know, according to the market.

It might take two and a half years.

If there's upheaval in the market, it might take up to three years.

But once we get there, the expected annual debt service is ten million dollars a year.

Okay.

So um what and what you're probably reading there in the document is that our you know, our council and our financial advisors want to make sure that we've got enough breadth and bandwidth, you know, to accommodate different uh changing economic scenarios.

And so if it says anything close to 27 million dollars a year in debt service, I'm pretty sure that's like a doomsday scenario for us.

Uh okay.

So what I'm reading, and I just want to make sure I fully understand the financing piece of this, which I know is your housing expertise.

I mean, you're awesome at all things housing.

Yes.

But kind of how you came to us in DeCap County is number two on page three.

So it states that the chief financial officer of the county and b bond council will, with respect to the bonds, provided that the aggregate principal amount of the bonds should not shall not exceed 25 million.

The interest rate on the bond shall not exceed 10 percent.

The bonds must mature not later than 2056, which is 30% from now, not 40.

Yes.

And the maximum principle of an interest on the bond to be paid in any calendar year shall not exceed 27.5 million.

Yeah, that's that's to allow for enough you know, bandwidth, if you will, for you know, changing market uh conditions.

Okay.

And so really what you're re what you're reading there when it comes to you know 10 percent interest rate, because interest rates are not at 10 percent right now.

Right.

Um, and the 27 million dollars, you know, and and debt service, that's you know, like kind of what I described as kind of a financial economic doomsday type of scenario.

Yeah.

So if we were issuing, you know, bonds within the next 60, 90 days and you know, kind of who knows what can happen in the macro global economy and there's a spike in interest rates, it's basically saying, you know, the parameters that we're setting for ourselves won't exceed what you see down on that paper.

I guarantee you, probably if we were in a situation where we were going to uh uh enter into a scenario where that debt service was going to cede a certain amount on $25 million, we would actually you know put a hold on all of this because that would mean you know, under any reasonable condition, the market is not in a position to accept, you know, this type of financing at this level at this time.

Okay.

So um the resolution again, um it states on page three number two that it would extend through 2056.

So that commits us to the IGA that I believe either you probably the CEO would execute for 30 years.

Is that correct?

Yes.

So what type of um monitoring or assurances do we have on an annual basis that things are are moving according to our plan and that we don't have to put it on pause?

Is this something that will come in front of the board for continued approval approval year after year so we can require um at least an evaluation of the previous year?

Oh, yeah, absolutely.

So um so a couple of different you know things uh and and to answer your question a couple of different ways.

So every time that we come uh back before the board um seeking a new you know issuance of bonds, you know, to draw down another tranche of bonds, we'll be able to communicate how you know the current issuance, you know, the current outstandings are performing uh as well as what we anticipate or estimate, you know, the next advance, you know, will do.

Um but also when it comes to monitoring compliance and performance uh in regards to the programs and the outcomes and desired outcomes of the programs, we're installing, I'm installing in a partnership you know with the working group, uh really a comprehensive um system, if you will, for tracking uh the outcomes for the housing investment bond, you know, by program, the demographics on who served uh the locations of the properties and and who served and all of the things.

But also when it comes to monitoring compliance and performance in regards to the programs and the outcomes and desired outcomes for the programs, we're installing, I'm installing in partnership with the working group, really a comprehensive system, if you will, for tracking uh the outcomes for the housing investment bond, you know, by program, the demographics on who served the locations of the properties and and who served on and all of the things we're trying to build a comprehensive system where we can track all of that.

So when we report on performance is going to be more than just you know the financial performance of the bonds.

It's going to be a conversation around you know here are the programs you know that we've launched here how are here's how those programs are performing and the desired outcomes that we're hoping to achieve and how they're performing against those uh metrics.

And quite honestly it'll be a conversation around here are some changes you know that we may want to make so for example if we find that you know one program is not moving as fast you know as we originally anticipated you know because of changes in market shifts we may recommend at that particular point in time a change in programming allocation you know moving dollars from one program you know that's not moving to another program that's fast moving or oversubscribed so that we can continue to move you know the engine forward.

So I anticipate that we'll be having you know that conversation at least on a quarterly basis in terms of our performance uh and the housing arena and one of the things that we're you know anticipating I've mentioned this in separate conversations regarding the comprehensive housing plan is really establishing that body that will be a you know kind of a public facing body so we can provide transparency to the public as well as you know our various stakeholders and ultimately to you as the you know Board of Commissioners on how we're performing against not just our outlined housing goals in respect to the housing investment bond but according to all of the different strategies that are going to be included within the comprehensive housing plan and how we're performing against those measures as well.

So I anticipate probably the like as uh I think I mentioned to you last week that probably within the next two to three weeks you'll be receiving some information on what the strategy and proposed structure of that body is going to look like very good um I always pause when we commit future administrations to anything and that has I did a NAVO want as a result of that.

And so this right here it extends to 2056 and I just quickly read through while you were speaking the now therefore be resolved section of the resolution I don't see anything in here about um ongoing monitoring of performance ongoing monitoring of the funding anything related to quarterly or biannual reports from the housing authority.

So if that is indeed the case can we add a c I guess make it number seven in this resolution that they that we're building something in just to ensure that the funding is being executed as stated as that the program is going smoothly that if we do hit to a point where you feel that um we need to take a pause it I would feel a lot better if it was in writing I mean because we can go back and access video that says you said it but if there ever is a problem that won't hold up in court so yeah and I can this money's all going to the housing authority right?

Yeah well it's going through the housing authority as kind of a as a pass-through entity it's not like and then it's coming back to you to execute on the programs.

Yeah it will let's describe it as it's coming under my purview to execute uh on the on the programs so think of the housing authority as our agent it's a means to an end and so we're issuing the bonds through the housing authority uh the housing authority be responsible as the lead program or primary program administrator for essentially kind of holding the accounts and they'll have sub-program administration agreements with you know all of our different entities decide to cab um the housing development corporation the CAV regional land bank authority so on and so forth in order to execute and implement you know all of the programs but ultimately oversight uh if you will and monitoring kind of falls you know to the chief housing officer because the county is the sponsor for all of these activities.

So you'll find and I believe it's located in the intergovernmental IGA all yeah the IGA all of the information in regards to compliance regular reporting administration all of those things that you just mentioned they're embedded within the intergovernment and so and I'll look to counsel who's looking at me right now if we needed to amend the resolution so that it clearly references the IGA you know could we on those particular matters could we add language for that or is it best incorporated there look for your guidance on that.

If we needed to amend the resolution so that it clearly references the IGA, you know, could we on those particular matters, could we add language for that, or is it best incorporated there?

Uh look for your guidance on that.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I really don't think it's necessary.

I think the safeguard is in the language of the IGA, and please rescue me if I'm wrong, but a part of the procedural application and execution that you described may be comforting to Commissioner Spears.

When they get ready to do another drawdown, they will come back.

And the board in place, the governing authority of place at that time, would be the ones putting the brakes on if they elected to propose a drawdown that the governing authority was not comfortable executing.

Is that fair?

That you're absolutely right.

You're absolutely correct.

So what this resolution does is it gives us permission to go forward and more specifically on the initial 25 million dollars.

Let's say, you know, in January or February of next year, we review pipeline and things, and we want to come back for an additional tranche in January, February, March, whenever that time frame is uh early next year, and we want to ask for 40 million dollars at that particular point in time, the Board of Commissioners you know can either issue their approval or not, you know, to proceed with the next tranche funding.

So while we're you know committed to you know this process per se, and we're you know trying to commit to these programs, every funding decision for an additional issuance of bonds requires a board of commissioners approval.

So I'm reading through the resolution, and again, I've had to do it quickly.

Um I don't even see a reference in here to the IGA.

Can someone point me to where it states that there is an IGA?

Is it at the very end?

It's the exhibit.

It's the exhibits, right?

Yes, and the agenda item references the approval of the second if you will.

Okay, is it is it in here?

Oh, it's under the second agenda item.

Okay.

Okay, fantastic.

So it is in here.

May I, Mr.

Chair?

I just think this would be helpful.

Yes.

Commissioner Spears, if you think of these as companion items, what you'll find is Dr.

Ferguson has explained the financing in the bond item.

The companion item of the programming is where you'll find the IGA and all of the execution will happen under the companion item.

This is just the finding the financing.

So it's analogous to we have an allocation item and then we have an actual award and execution item.

That's how these are working together.

And um that's good.

Respectfully, County Attorney Phillips, um, I don't agree with you.

I think that there should be some language in the resolution on the first item that does at least have some statement that we as the governing authority are going to monitor the progress of this initiative, and that we're going to that we recognize we have a fiduciary responsibility to get it right.

And so, Dr.

Ferguson, if I I am respectfully requesting a statement in the first item that just even states that it's a companion item and that you can find the monitoring, the valuation, the performance review, that type of thing that's in that second item.

And so just that would give me a lot of confidence, a lot more confidence that we are keeping our eyes on this.

It's a lot of money that we're to use your close, I will uh paraphrase your language, that we're channeling these dollars to them, to the housing authority as our agency representative, and then they're kicking the funds back to us that will then stand up your housing programs.

And I understand clearly, and I'm grateful for it that you basically the buck will stop with you on these housing programs.

Yeah, absolutely.

So if they fail, we'll be looking at you going, what happened?

But if um I think for me, again, because this is 30 years out, and we're committing, think about that.

We're committing that to basically four administrations moving forward, because Commissioner Um Madam CEO, we're in year two of her.

And we'll start it in hopefully Q4 of this year.

And I'll that's my second point in a minute.

Um, and then we'll have two more of her administration plus the remainder up to 30 years.

And so again, I would feel more comfortable if we would include some language in there.

And that takes me to my second point.

Um that you said earlier.

I know there's a time sensitivity on this.

We had a uh millage rate vote last week.

It was a very hard decision for me.

It weighed on me incredibly heavily, because I believe that people right now are really financially struggling, truly.

And we have a we're at 20 percent water increase.

We had two other rate increases.

Now we have a property tax increase, and we have groceries going up, housing going up, which which is what we're trying to address.

But that's what's happening right now to people.

So that really weighed on me heavily.

When you just stated that we may not be able to start some of the programs until next year, that's concerning to me because that millage rate is for this year, it's for 2026.

No.

So we need to make sure we've got some some money very quickly going towards our housing programs, because that's the reason that I voted on it.

Yeah.

And I 100%, I 100% agree with you.

But for our partners that are engaged in this, and quite frankly, you know, for the best decisions that we we could make, it did not make any sense for us to start, you know, dedicating dollars, dedicating resources.

I understand.

Until the tourists you know, building and investing in programs, if there wasn't going to be a way a pathway forward for us to launch the housing investment bond and actually launch, you know, unlaunch these programs.

Uh I 100 and so I agree with you, the sooner we can get these different programs, you know, to market, the better.

And I and what I will say is that you know, there is a tremendous amount of interest, and I fully expect that during the second half of this year, we're gonna, if we can get the programs actually launched, we're going to have uh a significant amount of flurry as activity, you know, going into fourth quarter and and going to the first of the year.

So we're we're not hesitating, but it's the prudent decision for us uh to move forward with these once the programs have been approved, once the bond financing has been approved, and thank you, you know, very much, and thank all of the commissioners very much for the robust discussion and debate that you had regarding the millage rate.

But as a benefit of making that decision, we now have the funding in place that supports the affordable housing fund.

Um and by having that funding in place to support the affordable housing fund, it gives us as the administration of the county, and more particularly than I am at them, our CFO, uh the comfort that we can issue bonds.

Yeah.

You know, that we actually can and do have the capacity to issue bonds and we can manage this debt service, you know, going forward.

Um so it's all you know intertwined, it's all linked together.

Um if it was up to me, I would have come to you for approval for a housing investment bond and programs, you know, in May uh, you know, of this year.

But I think it was prudent, and I think it was the right decision to ensure you know that the funding is in place.

Otherwise, we could get off to a false start and then we have to retreat.

And one of the things, one of the things that we convey when we have these approval decisions on the table and we commit these re resources is confidence in the market.

Because I won't miss any words, there was a lot of doubt uh with me coming in that whether the Cab County could accomplish anything in the housing space.

Um, but now that doubt has been removed to a certain extent, and people like the momentum that we have on a variety of different fronts, and they want to see that work continue.

And this is a part of continuing that work and building that confidence.

Yeah, I won't you know kind of belabor the point, but we were in a meeting just this morning and talking about you know the proposed housing investment bond, and a group of you know very strong and significant and important partners said to us the Cab County, we're with you.

We're we're with you, we're behind you.

If you need us, call us.

We're here to help you know in this housing space.

So, you know, I can't emphasize enough that you know this is something that the market's been waiting on.

I think it's something that our residents uh and stakeholders in our community need and they've been waiting on.

And honestly, I think it's kind of the sentiment is finally, you know, the Cab County is doing something to address these issues and challenges.

All right.

The last comment I have, and then I'll wrap up.

Um, is when you and I were meeting, one of my questions I posed to you on two different occasions is if if the millage rate um vote, if you don't does it pass, basically.

If you didn't get the property, the half mill rate increase that we needed to appropriate a lot of a big portion of those funds to housing.

Which programs could you still stand up without that mill rate increase?

Tell me again what I think it was four of them.

What four programs were you planning to stand up if that mill rate increased um did not pass, and what is the plan to get at least maybe one or two out of the gate sooner than later.

Yeah.

So the the four programs that that I would have stood up, you know, if the mill millage rate did not increase really falls into you know the categories of serving the most vulnerable and what are resident focus.

So I would launch the down payment assistance program, I would launch the owner occupied rehab program, I would um continue our efforts um and initiatives in the homelessness area, and I would uh focus on multifamily blight uh because those um all three of those, you know, all four of those areas are extremely important.

Um, but as well as I think the multifamily um blight uh issue is very important uh because some of those blighted properties have plagued those communities for decades.

Right.

And it's only going to get worse.

It's not going to get better unless there is some intervention by the county.

So that's the fourth program I would stand up.

Okay.

Excellent.

All right.

Um well, thank you so much.

So in summary, I am cautiously optimistic.

Yes that we will have some success in the housing space this year with the additional funds that you will be receiving.

Um amending the resolution just to add some language to there being a um some type of an evaluation framework and just making sure that things are running.

30 years is a 2056, I'll probably be dead.

That's a long way away.

And uh I just think we need to make sure I'm kind of getting that old.

This job is doing it to me.

I'm just saying it's a long way out.

And I think we need to just make sure, because you might you may be here 30 years, you may not.

I don't know.

Uh I just think we need to make sure that we do everything we can to put some guardrails around this program so it does continue to evolve and it does provide the solutions that we're also very hopeful for.

Thank you, and I yield back.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, Commissioner.

Um, and then just to um follow up on that specific um amendment.

I did see in on the second agenda item in section 6.10 responsibilities of the housing authority says um I'll kind of cut to the chase here.

So it says um the the housing authority will be payable from the from the payments received by the custodian on behalf of the housing authority under this contract, as providing here on in the bond resolution, in addition, the administration of the housing investment bond program will be responsibility of the housing authority as provided in the program agreement.

The housing authority shall be responsible for the oversight and review of the information and reports presented by the county, acting through Chief Housing Officer to Cab County on a periodic basis.

So I think that's to me that's the the kind of the nebulous clause is on a PR so and presumably the housing authority will have their regular board meetings.

Um and then of course I think the commissioners would also want to get kind of basically the same reports.

So are y'all open to um you know, and I don't know if it's either a in the past we called it uh we were gonna create a housing committee that basically was a committee of the whole, but where we had a meeting where it was just the housing update um which would maybe give us a little more time.

I'd love that, or I think the very least would be just a committee, the whole quarterly update, you know, from you, and then we'd have to kind of operate in a smaller time, you know, time period because of just the the meeting.

But any thoughts on kind of that periodic basis sort of setting a goal for what we're talking about there.

Yeah, absolutely.

So it was always my anticipation and expectation that you were going to receive quarterly reporting.

Okay.

Um actually, you know, with the system we're trying to build and where we're trying to go, it would not just encompass activities under this housing investment bond, but it will be more you know, broader, if you will, more breadth in terms of encompassing our you know, all of our housing related activities within the county.

Um so it was you know, actually one of the things I was looking forward to is actually installing and building that system uh because I think it's you know, a incredibly important, you know, from um just a uh a data and information uh and planning perspective.

Um but also I think what it uh reinforces is transparency and accountability and for us to present to you and in turn you know uh sharing it with the public what our activities uh have been, what our progress uh you know will be and um and have honest, forthright discussions around you know, challenge of road box opportunities, you know, that we can pursue and resolve going forward.

Okay.

So um is that something maybe that the county attorney could just help us wordsmith in it sounds like a quarterly report is the goal.

Maybe there's a little bit of negotiation on how that manifests.

And I don't know, presiding officer Johnson.

Do you have any thoughts on how like a quarterly update would fit into the BOC schedule?

Um we can easily get that added to a cow agenda.

Okay.

Okay.

So at the very least, are y'all good with a quarterly cow update on housing?

Yes.

As a cow presentation, yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

So is that some Zach?

What do you think?

Potential language for the for the whereas clause.

Um I would say something to the effect on an annual basis.

The administration shall provide a financial and programmatic annual report to the board, say by August 1st or something like that.

Okay.

And in addition, separate from the clause, we can operationally, just like we do Grady and Martin and stuff and decide to get those quarterly reports.

Okay.

So in your quarterly report you're suggesting.

Right.

Or annual reports an annual.

As a whereas clause, but then operationally we do quarterly reports as you just discussed.

Okay.

County attorney Phillips.

I I just want to caution us as a group, whatever we decide to do, recognize that this is crafted by bond council.

And and we want to defer to bond council on what's appropriate in the resolution given that this is a bond item, which is you know a part of the construct here.

We have separately the active items, so whatever language we're adding may need to be better placed in the other item.

But we'll work with bond council to do the best we can.

Okay.

Yeah, I guess I was looking, I there's two agreement, there's two resolutions that look very similar.

And so I was looking at the second one.

Or no, I'm looking at the first one, but wherever it makes sense to insert it.

Yeah.

That's I think that's fine.

That's why I was trying to explain to Commissioner Spears that they are companions.

So all I'm suggesting at this juncture of your discussion is all of the recommendations will have to be run through bond council because they're ultimately the ones who are constructing the package.

Um I don't I wouldn't want us to leave this discussion with the idea we could put something in a bond resolution that's not proper for a bond resolution.

Okay.

Well, you can let them know that um we're enjoy their partnership and doing business with them and we have a meeting tomorrow.

So if they would please address this before tomorrow.

Because that's coming up quickly.

Yeah.

That's a Zach statement.

Um Mr.

Mr.

Treasurer Um Atkins.

Director Atkins, can you come up here?

Come on down.

Um I guess between the law department and Mr.

Atkins, that just that would be figured out, right?

Looks like the block's been passed.

I was going to say Bob.

We still have two more hours left in the day, so I will get with the question.

Okay, go ahead and share a mic there if you don't mind.

I'll go with bond counsel right after this meeting.

Okay.

Um then um Director Atkins, in terms of the just to Commissioner Longspears point, just to very clear.

So this bond of 25 million, it says in here, the interest rate on the bond shall not exceed 10 percent.

Um the bonds must mature not later than blank one of 2056.

I guess that's that a date to be determined in 2056.

The maximum principle of an interest on the bonds to be paid in any calendar year shall not exceed 25 27 million, five hundred thousand dollars.

So I think that's maybe where there was a little confusion because it sounds like it's like with this one vote, we're opening up this very high ceiling.

But what I thought I heard is the first the first two bonds are gonna be staged and then we're paying the debt service over that 40-year period.

But it wouldn't, it wouldn't necessarily be 27 million, it would have to be less, right?

Yeah, yeah, absolutely.

And that 27 million, I think takes into account like if we were to repay the bonds.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Just immediately.

Okay.

So that yeah, that's a bullet in case we were, I guess, in refinancing doing the next tranche or something like that.

We're going to pay it all at once.

Okay.

So just tell us what is the what will be the ongoing debt service on this first $25 million?

I think a couple few million, not the same.

So the goal with the bond is to add um, you know, the the FA is always looking.

So uh it may be 20 years, it may be 30 years the bond, but you know, how whatever is recommended with the interest rate and the pay repayment and all.

So remind me again, so are we gonna if we approving the bond resolution, are y'all still going to come back to us with the final final?

Oh yes.

Okay.

So that's just this is the y'all to go to the market.

So on and then all the details will be worked out.

Leave on the 18th, Diane, we we will be presenting a supplemental with blanks like we typically do that will show you.

It's not you don't even have it yet.

That that will have what the bond amount will be, what the interest rate will be, what the um and then um it gets finalized on the 25th, I believe.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

So here's my uh and I don't uh I've been going through the um like the actual intergovernmental agreement, because I think that's really where the the details are, Dr.

Ferguson, because presumably that's here's the this is the contract.

You know, here's the money, here's what we expect out of it.

So to me it seems like getting the bond resolution is a priority because you want to go out to the bond market by August 18th, but ultimately the money is not going to really be approved until we make that final decision when we get back the bids.

So the intergovernmental agreement, do those things absolutely have to be side by side?

I think yes.

I think they have to be side by side because our you know, partner agencies, you know, the housing authority, decide the cap, uh the land bank authorities, you know, so on and so forth.

You know, they don't have any confidence, you know, to move forward, or let it this way.

I shouldn't say they don't have any confidence.

They need certainty in order to move forward with their respect with their respective boards.

Okay.

And that provides them that certainty to move forward so that 6 o'clock tomorrow afternoon, they can get to work and they can start issuing some RFPs so we can try to get these programs moving, just as it's a very important thing.

And if I may, Mr.

Chair, you'll notice that the documents are companion items that reference one another.

And to try to separate them may require changing the deal the construct of the two contracts dramatically.

For example, on the bond item on page two, whereas clauses five through ten are really about the contract.

Okay.

And there's an express provision in this in the whereas clauses, whereas clause number six defines the term contract, references it and talks about it.

When you get to the second item, it talks about a bond resolution, which is the item in front of us right now.

So those companion items have cross-references that make them interrelated, if you will, and why they should be seen as companion items.

Okay.

And at any one time through the what is the mechanism for amending the um the IGAs with the housing authority.

In terms of the mechanism, two things would happen.

One, we would have to consult bond council to make sure they didn't have any implications on the bond.

But two, our normal process for amending it, we would go through crafting the conceptual amendment and make sure that we could inform the governing authority of the CAD to consider what the amendment is, as well as our partner, the housing authority.

And then when all the parties were clear on what we're trying to do, the respective governing authorities and proper process would be used to get authority to sign a document that changes it.

Okay, gotcha.

Okay.

Well, let's see if we can um Commissioner Terry.

Yes, sir.

Also um the IGA speaks to um that we will have the bond to to support the program.

So they do have to happen to together.

And also our current calendar uh includes having the housing authority when they will approve it and when decide the cab will approve it.

So uh again, if it's not then we'll just have to, you know, um move the calendar.

Okay.

Um what I'm hearing is let's make sure these exhibits, because the exhibit is where the program is laid out.

It's very detailed, Dr.

Ferguson.

So let's see if we can uh just talk about a couple of those individual items on the exhibit, because I think we're maybe missing a couple things that I wanted to address.

Um before I get into that though, um I believe currently there is a vacancy on the housing authority.

Is that right?

I think uh Mr.

Coleman passed away earlier this year.

So um can we and this is this was in the vein of um how we can get Board of Commissioners more um you know invested and sort of have that kind of feeling that we're all on the same sort of team and oversight is I think that if the CEO could appoint a member just in her in her mind as a 13A appointment, say it would be great to have a member of the Board of Commissioners appointed to the housing authority.

And I mean we've done that with decide to cab, clearly, because there's a lot of things we do together with decide to cab.

So to me that would be like a very clear manifestation of this is a you know, a way for us to provide kind of dual oversight but also participation.

So any concerns with that.

I would just request that we're able to have that conversation whether and that's not included in any of this.

It's not.

No, but I'm just I'm suggesting that that's the same.

And I'm but uh and but within that, the larger point is we should have we should fill that vacancy.

So if there's not already you know, folks that are I think are you know ready to go in, I mean I I guarantee you you'll have to have some volunteers on the board of commissioners.

Um and then I think just of course the law department could advise us on that term um you know what number seat that is, I guess, and that would know the term of the um of the appointment.

Um just a Dr.

Ferguson, just a couple things.

And I think they're pretty small.

I don't want to get too micromanage around it, because I believe what you're trying to do is give yourself kind of a broad framework uh to work on.

So under Exhibit A1, this is the CAP Home Start program, the county employee incentive is an additional five thousand dollars and there's a maximum employee assistance up to 25,000.

Um would it be appropriate, considering this is a kind of a long-term program, would it be appropriate to include an inflation adjusted number on that to give y'all some flexibility because you know right now every year 25,000 is is buying less, right?

And so I don't want to undercut us every year we move forward for the employee assistance program in particular.

Yeah.

Yeah, we could go ahead and and bake that in up front.

However, you know, it's my preference that if we were going to make adjustments like that, we would do that through the process of where we have you know kind of an annual, you know, conversation regarding the performance of the programs.

And we would bring forth recommendations such as if we you know want to provide you know a higher number of you know a higher amount of down payment assistance, um, you know, we could have that discussion because what that would do, kind of absent you know everything else, is reduce the amount of anticipated households that we could help.

And so I just want to be trying to make sure I'm transparent with the board by saying that if we increase this amount, this is the effect that we expect to have on the overall program.

And so I understand.

Well, I think that's that's the same thing.

But but you I mean, if you want to give me that latitude and give us that latitude, I'm not gonna refuse it.

Yeah.

Well, that's that's the issue.

It's not it's just really giving you the latter.

No, I don't I understand.

I mean, I think um, but again, like I think and this is more about just giving you the this the latitude because I think if we were setting a maximum and that 25,000 next year only buys you 24,500.

Yeah, you know, um in essence we're setting up we're setting a ceiling that is shrinking, you know, in terms of buying power every year for the next 10 years.

Yeah.

No, I completely understand.

But also, you know, I want to emphasize that the way we're structuring, you know, the Home Star program, you know, specifically is that we're structuring it in a way so that there would not be a reduction of benefit if that per prospective home buyer also qualified for other programs that brought additional down payment assistance.

Okay.

And so, you know, that way, you know, it kind of maximizes the benefit, you know, that we could offer, but at the same time still opens up that opportunity for them to pursue other sources of down payment assistance to kind of help close that gap.

So but again, I'm not gonna refuse it if you want to include uh automat, you know, for us to, you know, have discretion over, you know, adjustments for inflation.

Okay.

I'm I'm perfect, I'm perfectly fine with that.

You know, I'm just you know anticipating that you know we also need to have a conversation that we were anticipating providing this assistance to this many households, now it's gonna be this many households because we're giving fewer households more dollars.

Okay.

All right.

Yeah, I I get I got you.

Okay.

Um but I know are you gonna we're gonna go way past that 10,000.

Yeah, I think.

So I think you're gonna hit that goal and go beyond.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, I think we're gonna I think we're gonna go way way past you know the the 10,000 years too.

But yeah, you know, the you know the thing is is that um you know if somebody's gonna hold me accountable for you know producing 400 you know new homeowners.

Yeah, they're still gonna be out there saying where are my 400 new home new homers.

So um and I honestly at this point um again I don't want to micromanage it.

I think if we just gave you the latitude, this is really for the number section four, the DeCab County employee incentive.

Okay.

So I'm really focusing in on not capping out our employee assistance program.

Um so committee members, do you have any thoughts on just section four where it says the maximum employee assistance up to 25,000, and we just basically just have a note there that just says you know it's inflation adjusted.

Yeah.

And so just so just to be clear, when we talk about the employee assistance program, we're talking about $5,000 for you know DeCantham County employees that goes up to 140 percent of area media income.

If they also qualify at the other thresholds in total, they could get up to 25,000 in down payment assistance.

So if they're at 100 percent at AMI and below and they meet those eligibility requirements, they can get 20,000 there plus the 5,000 for being a CAV county employee.

So if you want to focus in on, you know, do we increase the incentive for you know the Cav County employees?

I'm more than happy to have that conversation around, you know, how can we increase that amount uh you know, you know, going forward, moving from 5,000 to 6,500 to 7500 or whatever the number.

I don't think inflation is that bad.

Well, I mean But I was I mean I'm just imagining.

We've seen we've seen double digit increases in in uh home values, you know, before.

And so I'm talking about just our dollar amount.

So um in other words, if we do have maximum employee incentives incentive of 5,000 in 2028, that $5,000 is really worth $4900.

So I I I thought I'm I'm kinda like nickel and diamond here.

Yeah.

Um so I forgive me for like being that down to the penny, but we we can definitely craft some language in respect you know to uh to that in terms of being able to adjust it according to like the consumer price index uh or something of that nature.

Uh because also, you know, along with inflation, we have fluctuation in interest rates.

And so interest rates go down, people can afford, you know, uh a larger mortgage, you know, uh payment per se.

And and so you know, other things we need to take into context, you know, with that.

So uh with that having been said, I think that type of provision, quite frankly, belongs within the guidelines of the of the program and not necessarily in the program language in itself.

Okay.

Um because guidelines are much more flexible for us to change and adapt rather than the actual core parameters of the program.

All right.

Well, I think that's a key point, Attorney Phillips, County Attorney Phillips, because um I guess if we were just treating this IGA and these exhibits as a contract, are we are we contractually limiting ourselves or are there provisions in the IGA that to draw Dr.

Ferguson's point give them flexibility in the programming documents which aren't being voted on here?

As I understand the way this is structured, there is appropriate flexibility, but there are those items that would have to come back properly to the authorities involved governing the various parties.

Yes.

Um if necessary, we could always amend the IGA down the road if the parties elected to change that construct.

Yes, yes, absolutely.

Um, because you know, circumstance you know, circumstances change, and just like you mentioned, you know, increases in cost increases inflation, you know, 25,000 dollars or $5,000 doesn't go as far as it used used to go.

We may make the conscious decision to say, well, let's change.

Um but we want to be able to bring that back to let everyone be fully informed of the change that we're recommending, why we're recommending it and having that discussion of moving.

But wouldn't it just be easier if it was already just in there and then we would have to come back every few years?

I'm perfectly confident.

Okay, you're in favor of our committee members.

All I'm asking for is just I mean, I I I do trust Dr.

Ferguson and your wisdom and that you'll make the right call within all the different little nuances of this, but I just want to make sure that we're codifying the flexibility in there.

Yeah.

So hopefully that's being conveyed.

But commission commissioners, uh, I'll open the floor for any comments or questions on that thought.

If you have it.

I'm fine with that.

Um I certainly have confidence and trust in you, sir.

Okay.

Thank you.

I do have another question though.

Um, before you go to that, Commissioner Johnson, anything on that.

I think I'm okay with that, but I'm a little confused right now where that gets added.

Yeah.

Can you can you look at where we could just add a little something in the middle of the thing?

I know section we want to do.

Okay.

It might be the $5,000 max is inflation adjusted as needed.

Yeah, we can yeah, we can definitely figure out where uh it's appropriate you know to add, you know, to add that language.

Okay.

Commissioner Long Spears.

Okay.

So um just to make sure I'm clear on this, the county employee incentive of $5,000 is open to every single employee.

Is that correct?

Yeah, we're yeah, that's the anticipation.

It's going to be open to every single employee that meets the eligibility requirements.

And so um if you I think this is why might be a little what I'm trying to understand.

So if you're below 100 percent AMI, your maximum assistance is 20,000 plus 5,000 equals 25,000.

Correct.

If you're 101 to 120 percent AMI, you're at 15,000 plus 5,000 equals 20,000.

Correct.

And if you're at 135 percent AI, you have 5,000.

Correct.

Is that correct?

Okay.

So it I could be 250 percent AI still.

Okay.

You could be 2005.

And we'll say, you know, good luck with house hunting.

Uh but doing 250 percent AI.

Okay.

All right.

Um my next question is under the number four, same section, applicants must you have three criteria listed here.

You stayed under uh bullet one, be a current to CAP County employee in good standing.

Is that full-time, part-time, both?

We're we were targeting the program towards you know, full-time uh employees, but I think those exact parameters are still kind of up, you know, for discussion.

Uh but typically you see these types of employee assistant housing programs targeted towards full-time employees.

Would you be comfortable just adding that language in that it only is for full-time employees?

Certainly.

Okay.

Fantastic.

That's um uh exhaust my comments, yield back.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

All right.

So um again, we're trying to get this voted on tomorrow, so you can you're taking notes.

I've got it.

Okay.

All right.

Um I know Zach always is taking notes.

Yeah.

Um exhibit A2, the um housing capacity building seat fund.

So I just wanted to just personally emphasize that the faith-based organizations, I think is uh a tremendously strong strategy.

Um Dr.

Ferguson, and hopefully, you know, between contacts we have in this room, rightly and and other um leaders in the faith community, we can um I I'd love I really would like to launch that ASAP, because I think there's a lot of partners in the faith community who have been kind of knocking on the door saying, let's let's work together.

Yeah, absolutely.

I think that's also kind of one of the lower hanging fruit in terms of you know a pathway to execution that we'll be able to launch this fall.

Okay.

Um exhibit A2 and then section five opening program initiatives, the CAB land bank capacity building initiative.

So I understand with the the goal there.

Are we gonna factor in um the land trust concept into this framework?

Yes.

So with the uh community land trust concept, they're currently right now, I think responses have been received on the on the feasibility study.

Okay.

Uh to select a party to complete that feasibility study.

And so once we get some information back, I think we'll be able to figure out how do we incorporate um and accommodate you know a community land trust if that's what you know the where the feasibility study drives us.

Okay.

All right.

So that would be so do are we comfortable this is the first bond, so understand it's not being mentioned because it hasn't been stood up, but do you think by the second bond we would be uh because I don't because that's the second bond would be complete the rest of the 155 million.

Is that the goal?

Yes, second one would be the bigger one.

Yeah, second would be no the the second you know bond is Oh okay.

Quiet Siri.

Yeah.

The the second bond is would would not be for like the balance for like 130 million dollars.

No, the second bond is would probably be for another transa fund.

So yeah, I'm anticipating it would be somewhere between you know maybe 25 to on the upper end.

Gotcha, 40 million dollars.

So uh hopefully the land trust feasibility study gets more details on it, and that potentially could be in an updated IGA.

Yeah.

It could potentially it could potentially be as a part uh of an updated IGA or you know, depending on you know where it lands and how we structure it, it could also be a part of a subprogram administration agreement that we do and execute with the CAV Regional Land Bank Authority because typically you see CLTs and land bank authorities kind of working in concert.

Yeah, absolutely.

Well, I think um I think it's really important.

I know Commissioner Michelle Long Spears has been working on this along with my office, but um I think when we think about those those units of housing, uh when we include the land trust in the conversation that we we're talking about permanent um housing.

And so I think you know, ex building up that program um really just sets legacy, you know, for hopefully in perpetuity as long as the land trust exists and that that property can stay affordable within you know the framework.

Sure.

Um so look forward to that.

Um you did say there there's a a contract or a procurement proposal coming for the feasibility study?

Yeah, for the feasibility study, um the the RFP closed.

Um we were successful from my understanding, there were nine you know, organizations, you know, that responded.

Uh so procurement is going through their you know, kind of preliminary set of you know, evaluation on the respondents, making sure that they meet you know the criteria and then they'll be sharing uh that list of kind of eligible respondents with the evaluation committee, uh hopefully sometime in the next couple of weeks.

Okay, great.

Thank you for that.

Um exhibit A3, the income and affordability tiers.

So we don't call out 30 percent AMI.

Um it in and we only have 20 percent of the portfolio um for the tier one, sixty percent AMI.

So can we adjust that to add in either more a higher percentage of the portfolio for the tier one, sixty percent AMI, or create a s an another carve out for thirty percent AMI?

We can look at creating you know a carve out for you know for you know for 30 percent of AMI uh and below.

I'm you know completely open and supportive of that.

You know, but it's also a matter of capacity you know within the ecosystem.

So typically when you're talking about households um you know that are at 30 percent of AMI and below, those households are served with uh within the context of the housing authority.

And with you know the current you know state uh public housing authorities here in the country and our housing authorities here in the Cav County are no exception, they're voucher constraint.

You know, demand you know for vouchers far out outweighs uh the supply of vouchers that they have have to give.

And so with that having been said, you know, one of the alternatives is kind of how you address that is you provide a higher level of subsidy per unit.

Right.

If you're gonna provide a higher level of subsidy per unit, then your overall yield or anticipated volume that you're trying to create with uh with your funds, you know, drops.

It reduces that amount.

Okay.

So um we can definitely look and see what a carve out for 30 percent of AMI uh looks like, and we can bring back, you know, before we you know roll out and lost these programs, what a tiering looks like that could target 30 percent of AMI.

Okay.

And I I don't want to cannibalize the 60 percent though.

So I mean if you were going to take, let's say, 10 percent of the portfolio from the 80 percent tier two or the 120 percent tier three, I mean, could we take five percent from each of those and put it down into the sixty percent?

And then that gives you flexibility to do some thirty percent, because it's basically below sixty percent.

We could, but I I think you will want your thirty percent uh AMI you know number to be meaningful.

Okay.

Uh and not just kind of a from my perspective, not just kind of a token, you know, 30 percent.

Well, and that's what I'm saying is I don't want to put it in here because I don't actually know what that number would be.

But if we gave you more to work with tier one.

So right now it's definitely definitely we can we can do that.

We can we can look at you know, kind of how almost kind of play uh with it as far as income averaging is concerned, a lot you know, some flexibility on the higher end to get more on the lower end, we can see how that blends together.

So could a suggested amendment to this exhibit A three.

Hello, hello.

Is that kick out of Okay?

I'm back live.

Okay.

So could we look at let's just say 30 percent of the portfolio is 60 percent or below AMI, and then 45 for tier two and twenty-five for tier three.

That's five percent from the higher categories.

And then that gives you the and understanding that it's just it's it'll be up to the program to figure out what percentage of the under 30 the 60 percent would be that 30 percent carve out.

Yeah.

Is that does that work?

Yeah.

Okay.

Commissioners, any thoughts on that one, any concerns?

I uh the goal is just that 30 percent, that 60 to 30 percent is basically like that's minimum wage.

So if we were talking about like a sanitation worker, $19 an hour would be 50 percent AMI?

I mean, it's it kind of depends, but like the minimum wage is really by driven by the size of the household.

I think so.

But uh a single person working at 725 an hour, the federal minimum wage.

Oh, then absolutely percent AMI.

Yeah, and I know we have like service workers, I mean Waffle House workers are trying to get a little just a couple more dollars on their paychecks, but they're not getting it.

Yeah.

Um so those that's that's the kind of the the target I'm looking for.

But so you're good with that.

Yeah, well, let me let me come back and let me come back and I can maybe even circulate this afternoon or early tomorrow morning, you know, some crafting of what those AMTs get low.

All right, we'll wait to hear back and then would love to get your thoughts on that ratio.

Um, a couple of quick things real quick.

So number uh exhibit A4 section uh bullet point eight affordability requirements.

So we have the mixed income developments.

Um the one thing though that Zach, we I don't think we've ever fully flushed out with the planning department is that we've had some affordable housing projects that were under a certain um in a certain overlay district which required a 20 percent non-residential component.

And what we're hearing from the affordable housing community is that that 20 percent requirement actually makes the proformas not work.

And so they were looking for more flexibility and maybe that's an administrative variance or something the planning department could do to work with the chief housing officer and say we could allow for less than you know, less than 20 percent non-residential, depending on the programming, the services, et cetera.

So I mean, does that make sense?

Because we've had some projects we have put on hold because of that.

It it it uh it absolutely makes sense because you know I'm assuming a lot of developers you're talking about are tax credit developers.

Yep.

Um, you know, using task credit, so you have to fund that, you know, through other channels.

So uh definitely looking forward to having those conversations with the other.

And that's not in here.

That's more just the planning department needs to just give us the get you know, bring forward to the board an amendment, you know, to the code on those sections that give some flexibility.

Yeah.

I mean, usually you've done it kind of like um like a um like a major modification or like a minor modification.

You just the planning department seeks administrative variance with approval from the two district commissioners.

And that's kind of the way we've been able to sort of do it with some checks and balances, but um you know, not have to go through the whole variance process.

Sure.

Okay.

Um exhibit A5, the um section six eligible repairs.

Um so I was looking, and I I this is actually something that myself and um chief sustainability Malagro talked about is within these major systems category, including at the very least, weatherization and energy efficiency, Dr.

Ferguson, because that's that's probably one of the best ways we can do a dual repair but also reduce someone's power bill.

Um and I'll give you a good example in Decatur in January for the MLK service project.

We went into a gentleman's home who had a a real bad disability and he really he was struggling, but he lived in one of those homes that was built in the 40s, and someone had I guess it was like a Georgia Power thing, they gave him a heat pump.

And his bill was $500 a month trying to cool that place down.

And when we went in there, it's because the basically it needs to be weatherized.

Like the the vents were loose, and so literally the AC was just pouring into the basement.

And then cock the windows, the lights, everything.

And so literally from $500 a month just by doing that weatherization got them down to $250.

So it was like a literally a 50% cut.

So some people like a housing affordability is related to all their other bills.

So um I mean it says electrical system upgrades without getting too micromanage, can that apply to solar, battery, weatherization, basically things to help improve energy efficiency in that person's home with the goal of reducing their monthly bill.

Yeah, so I definitely think we can uh include some energy efficiency uh you know standards.

Because quite frankly, just to be transparent, if we put out that we're going to pay for solar, then everybody's going to start trying to market solar to everyone.

And because of the type of construction, you know, that needs to, you know, the type of support, roof support that you need in order to support solar panels, not everyone's roof is going to be able to support that.

And so they're going to end up, you know, having a solar panel installation that may cause them future challenges, you know, with their roofs.

Or they're going to end up with a solar panel uh installation that's going to be completely non-functional because it doesn't commit to the rest of the wiring other types.

Well, keep in mind that we have the um the capital good fund that has been promoting a Department of Energy grant program that is basically helping pay for solar for folks who qualify.

Right.

But then one of the questions comes up is the roof.

So actually what really I think maybe to be very specific is someone might be able to get solar, but their roof needs to be repaired.

Yeah.

And so re or reinforce at the very least reinforced.

Yeah, exactly.

And so I think the point is that I'm not saying we should change the language, but that just when we're looking at these home repairs, one of the the fundamental questions we should ask is, hey, how much are you paying for power?

And if we find out, and maybe this is something through our energy manager, just could like have some mechanism where we just like do an energy audit, which I think are free, honestly, at Georgia Power.

Like the so coordinating through that to get an energy audit would just inform the teams that are going and reviewing these applications to say, oh yeah, like you need to get you know a front door repaired, you know, to get onto the um, you know, the front step, but you also have a $500 energy bill.

Trevor Burrus, Jr.

Yeah, I mean, you know, the programs that I work with in the past, there are some standards and returns uh in regards to you know energy conservation, water conservation, you know, the types of fixtures that you use, the types of appliances uh that you replace uh you know to encourage and support those things.

Uh so if we you know need to you know modify or adjust that language so that it accommodates those types of features, I'm perfectly fine, comfortable you know, with that.

And I can connect with uh Yeah, I think Chief Malagro has a ton of ideas on that.

I mean, I think she she could get that okay.

All right, last two things real quickly is um under exhibit A7.

Um I didn't see it in this section.

It seemed like it made sense to put here, but the the legal support, so that's sort of in the vein, Dr.

Ferguson, of the eviction assistance.

So you know, and this is something that our magistrate court has stood up a eviction sort of information center, but they can't, they told us they can't provide legal advice to tenants in the eviction court, which is where in the past, Zach, with TLAC money, we've provided that legal assistance.

So can we is there anything in any of this of these exhibits that is about supporting eviction?

So in other words, preserving housing by preventing evictions.

Yeah.

So the the orientation of the housing investment bond um is to provide support for for capital costs.

Okay.

What you're talking about is providing you know support for services.

And I think those types of requests are probably more appropriate for an allocation out of the affordable housing fund.

Excuse me.

Okay.

The affordable housing fund.

Not out of the bond proceeds.

Okay, so the housing authority is not doing that within their this agreement.

No, not fair.

Not within not within this agreement, but we could think because I'm also very interested in you know, eviction prevention.

Um also very interested in you know providing uh emergency rental assistance uh and a variety of other types of initiatives to kind of keep people housed.

Yep.

Um, but they don't fall within the confines of capital costs.

Okay.

It's more appropriate as some type of expenditure out of the affordable housing fund and those dollars.

Okay.

Uh instead of the bond.

Could I um ask y'all to come back to the board to just share what the strategy will be on the legal assistance?

Um I think the most impactful thing we can do is just to provide someone with some legal advice.

And before we even get into rental assistance, I think that and this we observe this with the extended state hotel families is that they are in those situations.

Some of them actually make enough money to rent at another apartment complex, but they're they have a a credit mark.

Yes.

And so the the our partners are well, I guess the private industry apartments will not rent to them if they qualify, so because they have that eviction.

And anything we can do to just prevent that eviction from going on the record and the stats I've seen is that even just some legal advice and how to handle it can actually yield to not getting the eviction.

They might still get evicted, but they won't get that on their credit report, is the point.

Does that make sense?

No, that no, that makes you know perfect sense.

And I definitely think that's something that we can explore.

Um and you know, as I'm also mentioned, you know, we're looking at you know ways that we can you know provide support for emergency rental assistance.

I think legal assistance and having that knowledge uh is important as well.

And we're even having some early discussions internally around engaging uh the apartment association so that we can kind of be proactive and disseminating some information to uh tenants in regards to you know, here are the different resources and programs and here's what you do if you find yourself in these types of situations.

Okay.

Um so is that so aside from this agenda item, we've approved the budget funding, you know, uh mechanisms act.

So when can y'all come back to us and share what the the housing fund, not for infrastructure but for programmatic what can we can we start something?

I was just talking to CO Williams about that uh this morning.

So um we're gonna get together.

We we need to have those some discussions around you know kind of prioritization of uses because you can imagine you know the the needs are many and the resources are fine.

So let's work together on that because the magistrate uh Judge Anderson came to us earlier this year and said that they were starting the eviction center that was information based, and we were talking about this, yeah, approving all the housing funds, and we said we would come back once we have the funding in place to talk with her about how there's some synergies.

Yeah.

So exactly if if there's you know already you know, some type of program or format in place and they just need you know support, you know, from us as a county resources from a county to kind of enhance or expand uh that service.

I would much rather you know work with you know uh a wagon that's already there than have to build a recreate a wheel from scratch.

Okay.

And we know how the part I mean, Atlanta Legal Aid, um, DeCAP Pro Bono, they each have like their own little sort of sections of you know, in place C CI or TY.

Right, and T Like, okay.

Um so uh Jessica, let's um just get with the magistrate court and coordinate a time for us just to um talk about that maybe a little bit later in like August, early September, if that makes sense.

August seems like aught.

Okay, all right.

We'll aim for August, just offline to just get everyone's heads together and then we'll wait to kind of hear y'all's thoughts on what we can do this year.

Um the last little point on the exhibit I wanted to uh highlight was exhibit A7, which is the transitional housing and extended stay program.

Uh number five pathways to permanency.

So we have rental payments, participants will not pay will pay 30% of their income towards rent weekly.

Um can we can that be scaled depending on how many children are in the household?

Because I think that might impact that 30% number.

In terms of it just says 30% of their income.

And that to me seems like a very arbitrary, it's not like a it's not a um a scaled, you know, like how we would scale AMI.

Oh, okay.

Um it's just kind of a loose, but it seems like it might be hindering it because if you have three kids, they might 30% might be more difficult than having one of the things that we're gonna do.

Well, typically it's 30% of income, but that income is adjusted based upon the size of the household.

Okay.

And so you know, if you're at lower income but you have a larger household, then that you know, 30% number is is less.

Okay.

Um if you were have a smaller household, you know, at the same income, then that 30% is more.

So we can uh definitely see what type of language we can use to kind of fine-tune that, but uh to make that more clear.

Okay.

That's typically like where you see like the scaling of adjustments.

Gotcha.

Okay, I just want to be, I just wanted to flag that.

I wasn't sure if that was going to be limiting, but it sounds like y'all are considering that.

Um the other one says employment requirements.

Participants must find employment within 30 days of entering the program if not already employed.

I think the thing that is going to be really crucial if we want to hit that 30-day requirement is we need to figure out a child care and transportation component.

Because I think the issue at Park 500 right now is it's it's a great location sort of for where at the time we needed it, but um the bus, the child care options are kind of disparate.

Yeah.

And so what we're hearing is there some of the families are having trouble like going and getting jobs or even applying because it's a transportation child care logistical thing.

So is there anything um is there any flexibility?

I'd hate to um, you know, kind of immediately handicap a family because there are other things that were kind of that are part of the equation that aren't explicitly risk, you know, mentioned here.

Um yeah, I think you know, I think so.

There are you know, ways that we can you know kind of you know target where the housing is located to make sure that it has acts you know those types of access points and quite honestly, you know, putting families in proximity, you know, to you know, transportation, access to quality child care, um other types of service and many, you know, helps you know towards the stability of the family.

So I think we can have some flexibility around those guidelines in terms of where geographically units are placed and what the target.

I'm gonna um connect y'all with um the Clarkston uh development foundation.

Uh we did a a ready school initiative in Clarkston that created on-site child care by training the the family the mothers basically to learn um to get decal certified.

Yeah.

And so it actually created on-site child care sort of in a more family-centric sort of setting.

And it would end up using some units.

So units would be refurbished to be kind of gutted from a housing unit instead of a child care sort of pod, if you will.

No, no, no.

We just need to be a little flexible with how we And I and I've seen those types of exercises before.

I think the the you know the the key point is to know and have that as a part of the plan and going in.

Uh and that way you can make all those types of modifications and adjustments in terms of you know, making sure that you know the projects are you know feasible and sustainable, but absolutely those are some of the types of things that we can accommodate, but we need to just have a eyes wide open, you know, clear shot on what it actually means to the overall project.

Okay.

Um and the last kind of bucket area I wanted to raise our attention to, and um I got my purple pen and Commissioner Johnson's got her purple shirt on is um housing assistance and support for victims of domestic violence.

And that's something we had heard from our uh partners at the Women's Resource Center, is that that there's so many uh so many um cases that are coming their way and they're constantly scrambling to find sometimes short-term or even some medium-term housing for the families that they're assisting.

And so are there going to be opportunities in this first tranche of 25 million to build out specific portfolios to support the domestic violence um housing needs?

So we haven't specifically you know visit it on on that particular topic, so I would be hesitant to say there's gonna be an opportunity there.

Um, because that, you know, quite honestly, that part, you know, just wasn't on our radar screen.

But it is definitely something that we can you know start to explore and figure out, okay, how do we devote capital to trying to create these types of spaces to serve you know that population and probably others and you know, you know, continue on that path.

We did craft uh at least at this onset, then craft any type of specific program, you know, regarding that.

But it doesn't mean that it's off the table and we can't craft something in the future.

Okay.

Okay, let's let's start that conversation with um I think the solicitor would be the main point because they're really in and maybe the DA as well.

But if we could work with I mean I think what the statistic we're seeing is it's still we're in the 20,000 number in terms of annual domestic violence calls that the police are getting.

And you know, every year the different partners are trying to raise money to support the women's resource center for these very these very services.

And I think it just would go a long ways in helping us um be a part of the solution on you know that it's a lot a lot of services are needed, but housing's is coming to the top of the top ones.

Yeah, absolutely.

Absolutely.

I agree.

Okay, great.

All right, so we'll work on facilitating those conversations.

Um Commissioner Johnson, any other comments, questions, thoughts?

I'm good.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

So um let's go ahead and um open the floor for a motion on uh both items.

And um maybe Commissioner Johnson, I think Dr.

Ferguson's gonna come back with a couple of tweaks on what we talked about for the um any amendments that um I think you cut you got them all right.

So do we need to repeat them or we just got them?

Okay.

All right, we're gonna trust you took the notes right, uh, which is fine.

I'm sure we did.

So you want to just acknowledge that in your motion, Commissioner?

Yes.

Okay, go ahead.

I will move to approve agenda items 1043 and 1044 with um forthcoming revisions as discussed.

All right, I will second.

Um and just for discussion, so Zach, are you all uh good to kind of do some tweaking of the language before tomorrow?

Yes, I I think so.

And the the main uh takeaway, the first one that I captured was dealing with the uh reporting.

Okay.

Um that's a big one.

Okay, great.

And then reporting in the inflation adjustment.

Yeah.

Giving the authority to the director or the chief.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right, very good.

Um, all in favor, is you can say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes aye.

Motion carries.

All right.

Thank you, Dr.

Ferguson.

Thank you.

Carry forward.

Uh one more vote tomorrow.

Yeah, one more vote tomorrow, trust me.

Um Zach, did you want to did we need to bring up the um the walk on?

Or is it we could just to share really quickly?

Just articulate what we're going to do tomorrow if you don't mind.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

So um in discussing with uh Mr.

Sigler, apparently when we adopted the millage rate uh last Tuesday, there were two scribner areas errors that are worth noting that we would like you to modify or uh in tomorrow's meeting.

One was dealing with the city of Stonecrest millage rate.

And I guess it's important to note the total millage rates are accurate.

Um it's just that there was a transposing of millage rates in the city of Stonecrest, I believe it was their roads and drainage and parks, was it TJ?

Roads and drainage and parks, the numbers were simply transposed.

Okay.

Uh and we want to correct that.

And the other was in the city of Pine Lake.

I think there was a number of 0.3 in one of the millage rates, and it should have been 0.4.

That's from memory.

Okay.

I'm seeing a re a red line here where you're okay.

So uh TJ, anything else you want to add to that?

No, just briefly I'll I'll just explain the red line.

So the way that the resolution is structured, there are 15 different paragraphs.

One for the bond service or or bond debt service, excuse me, um, one for unincorporated, and then one for each of the cities.

And so the the errors were on page three, uh paragraph eleven.

That's Pine Lake, where the general fund millage was off by one really thousandth of a uh excuse me.

Yeah, thousandth of a mill there.

And then the second is on page four, paragraph thirteen.

The um what happened there is the millage rate that was reflected for the um road maintenance was actually the park's millage rate, so that's been corrected as well.

Okay, and that's from point two oh six to point one two nine.

Correct.

And the and the way that this is structured is at the top of each paragraph, it has the total.

The totals are correct.

It's just that those two components of it were um were just scrivener scriveners areas.

Okay.

Okay, great.

Thanks for catching that.

Um County Attorney Phillips, is there anything I mean we're gonna y'all are gonna walk this on tomorrow, so um anything the committee needs to do?

I don't think so.

Um at most you could you could approve correcting the scribbers error.

Okay.

By definition, this is a typographical error.

It doesn't change the substance at all.

And it's more than anything else correcting the record so that the document matches what we have reported to the state.

The totals are the same anyway.

TJ, please rescue me if I'm mistaken on that.

No, that's correct.

And as well, this is what was presented in the um all the other supporting documentation.

Okay.

All right.

Well, I mean, this is this serves as committee review, so I think we've reviewed it.

Um Commissioner, you want to do a so move?

Some move.

What county attorney Phillips said.

Have fun with that.

All right.

Uh second.

And um all in favor, you can say aye.

Aye.

Chair votes I motion carries.

All right, we'll take care of that tomorrow.

Um, and then um Zach, I did want to just um real quickly on the CIP priorities.

So we did ask the commissioners to share um kind of the I would maybe say the top top CIP priorities.

And so um as you can see here, we've got um Mason Mill Senior Center.

Um it should be Avondale Dunair Park, right, Commissioner Johnson.

It's one park, yes.

So Avondale Dunair Park is.

And we do have an estimate from 2021.

Yes.

And that was actually already going through permitting.

But yes, we do have an estimate.

We do have estimates for all these actually.

Um so we have the so that's for um Avendale Dunair Park, um, and then we have the Atlant the the renovate the new renovated Atlanta DeCap Senior Center, and then the Pleasant Dale Park uh Master Plan, which is just the whole park master plan.

So I believe that I believe Parks has the Pleasant Dale Master Plan Avendale.

I believe I've seen that.

Dun Air Park does.

Um Director Mitchell has the Atlanta DeCap Senior Center estimates, and then Mason Mill is right there as well.

So really just wanted to, just because I know y'all are getting close to kind of presenting your plan, but um wanted to flag these as the top ones we received um from commissioners.

And would really, really like for you to put them in the plan.

Over the next five years, we'll be reasonable.

Right.

You know, we'll work with y'all.

But these are these are ones I think that um the districts have been working on for many years.

And so we're just you know, we're trying to catch up on some long overdue projects.

You know, just for my part, the Atlanta DeCap Senior Center been working with Commissioner Masaya on this one.

Um that senior center was is like the oldest.

Um and so it's it's really it's outgrown itself.

It's kind of has some issues, and so that would be uh basically the last senior center that we've like upgraded of all the original senior centers.

You know, Avondale, Dunair Park, Commissioner Johnson, I know Commissioner Bradshaw worked on this um before you came here, so want to support you and keeping that plan moving forward.

Mr.

Chairman.

Yes.

So that one is moving forward pretty good.

This was part of my conversation I had with my one-on-one with Madam CEO, and we um got in touch with um Director Bass.

So, like I said, this one is in permitting.

We also have awarded 2.2 million in federal congressional direct spending, and the goal is for renovations to start first of next year.

So that one is definitely moving forward.

So I assume some funding had been set aside if we're that far along on it.

But okay, good.

Well, especially if we have federal funds, we need to have provide matching dollars.

Right, right.

And so and thank you.

We we will take all of these on under advisement and and and see if there's already funds allocated, if that's sufficient funds, if there's additional funds needed.

Um we will explore various sources of funds.

Uh a lot of times when I see senior centers, I think HUD 108 loans.

We've been Yeah, that was direct director Mitchell's advice is we just need a um a collateral uh mechanism, which I think we've done uh very used the facilities in the past.

So we'll take a look at at these and and be as creative as possible and see what we can come up with.

Okay, great.

And I'm counting six commissioners uh are being covered by this.

Anything from seven in here?

Well, I mean it's well it is um in um five.

I'm sorry, yes, you're right, five and seven.

But they just got a Lou Walker Center, didn't they?

Or the I'm sorry, they got the uh Bruce Street, didn't they?

I just don't know if that's how it works, but uh they also have Lucius Sanders coming from.

Yeah, Lucia Sanders, thank you.

Yeah, yeah, they're yeah, five and seven already got theirs.

So this is the other commissioners.

Commissioner Johnson did not say that part, just to be clear.

Um is that we'll wait to hear back from you.

Absolutely.

Um okay, great.

All right, that is all of our agenda.

I'll take a motion to adjourn.

Move to adjourn.

Second, all in favor?

I meeting adjourned.

Thank you all so much.

See you tomorrow.