Good morning.

The time is now 10 a.m.

and we're gonna go ahead and call our committee of the whole to order.

Um and I am not David Legrand.

I am just filling in for him.

Um and the mayor should be back for our closed session and also be here for the 2 p.m.

meeting.

So let's go ahead and get started.

We have a number of items.

First is a resolution approving election day polling locations for the May 5th, 2026 special election and fixing inspector pay for absent voter counting board and the election day inspectors.

Do you have a motion?

So move for support.

Moved and supported, Mr.

Clerk.

Yeah, so the um this election coming up in May 5 is for Kentwood Public School Millage.

Um, because it's such it's only it's under 5,000 voters.

The the state law state law allows the election commission to consolidate precincts into one location.

So for this for this election, all voters that are that live in the city of Grand Rapids and Kentwood Public Schools will be at Brookside Christian Reform Church at Kelma Zoo and 36th Street.

Also um we're requesting an increase in election day um pay um due to the increase in um minimum wage.

Um so that that affects um the the uh regular election worker pay and so uh um and then also um I have that drafted into next year in the 27 budget for the August and November elections, but also for this May election, the Kentwood Public Schools will be paying all the election costs.

Thank you for confirming that.

Um colleagues, question for the clerk on this item.

Nope okay.

All right, all those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Item carries.

Next is uh number number two is a resolution establishing an obsolete property rehabilitation district pursuant to public act 146 of 2000 for the Gideon Project LLC at 801 Oakdale Street Southeast.

So move support.

It's been moved and supported, Miss Renero.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Uh yes, this is a project on Oakdale at 801.

And this is an existing building where the developer is gonna activate um, I'm sorry, rehabilitate for connected commercial properties by can uh creating two main floor uh commercial spaces and two second story apartment uh build uh units uh where one will be rented at 80 percent AMI and the other will be rented at 50 percent AMI.

Uh this qualifies for the base 10-year um abatement from the city's policy, and we're adding a year because of that um unit lower than 50 or 80 percent.

Happy to answer any questions.

Great, thank you for this.

Um colleagues, any question?

My colleagues in the third ward, any comments on this one.

So happy we're here.

Okay.

Final about vote.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

And the next is a companion item, but we'll take that separately.

So all those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

The item carries.

Thank you.

Resolution carries.

Item number three is a resolution approving 11-year obsolete property rehabilitation exemption certificate pursuant to public act 146 of 2000 for the Gideon Project LLC at 801 Oakdale Street Southeast.

So moved to support.

Moved and supported.

Nothing to add, I would assume.

So all those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

The resolution carries.

Item number four is thank you, Ms.

Renero.

Item number four is a resolution to set a public hearing on April 28th, 2026 on the necessity of special district.

You're really making me remember all that.

Um I don't have my glasses.

On the necessity of special assessment role, um 8806 for the downtown improvement district.

So we'll support.

All right.

Uh we got a special guest here today.

Melvin, good nice to see you.

Yeah, good to see you guys to you.

Good morning, Commissioner.

Melvin, is your is your mic on?

I I think there we go.

Okay, thank you.

Here we go.

There we go.

Good morning, commissioners.

Good morning, uh, Mr.

Washington.

I'm uh Melvin Elledge, the director of operations at downtown Grand Rapids Inc.

Here to just give you a quick overview of the downtown improvement district.

I do.

So we're gonna cover quickly today what is the DID, how does the DID work, what does the DID do?

Uh briefly talk about stakeholder feedback, uh, provide a high-level overview of the operations plan, and then just go through what the reauthorization process for the improvement district looks like.

So, what is the downtown improvement district?

It's an important place management tool that helps keep downtown clean, beautiful, and welcoming all year long.

It was established in 2000 to provide an enhanced level of services beyond what the city provides, and it cannot legally replace any city or government services, and it's funded proportionally by office buildings, retail shops, downtown residents, essentially real property owners within uh the downtown district.

And this is the uh uh area of the DID where it operates, so the large yellow area is the general service area where we provide most of our services, uh, and then the blue area is uh the snow melt district where we operate seasonal snowmelt infrastructure.

And this is a current list of our board members that uh are sitting around the table.

And so how does the DID work?

So essentially property owners in a district uh request services, whether it be sidewalk uh cleaning, public safety enhancements, landscaping, etc.

The improvement district delivers these services, property owners cover the cost of those services and all of the properties benefits.

See all the smiley faces, so we know that's true.

Uh and then quickly, uh, this is how assessments sort of break down for individual property owners.

So land area, building square footage, and parcel frontage all make up about 90% of the uh assessment that a property pays, with the remaining 10% coming from any parking area on the parcel.

Residential property owners pay a 120 dollar annual flat fee.

They're not assessed the same as other uh property owners.

Nonprofits also receive a 40% reduction in assessment costs, and assessments are typically billed annually in September.

So, what is the DID do?

So, primarily our activities fall in these four buckets.

Uh things like sidewalk sweeping, clearing snow, et cetera, fall in the beautification maintenance bucket.

Uh we provide business support through marketing and promotion of downtown, supporting downtown business owners uh safety uh through reporting low-level crime to GRPD, street uh repair issues, things like that.

Uh and then just sort of community assistance, so helping visitors who come in and out of downtown, uh working with the homeless outreach team to engage uh to engage our unhouse population, um, things like that.

And so really quickly want to touch on stakeholder feedback.

So every year the improvement district distributes an annual survey to our uh stakeholders, essentially to gauge how they are viewing the services and responding to the services that we are providing.

We had 110 respondents this year, which is the most we've ever had.

You can see a breakdown there as well as get a little taste of the survey itself.

I won't go through all of the results, but I wanted to highlight sort of this particular uh outcome.

So these are sort of the eight predominant services the improvement district uh provides, and paying special attention to the dark blue and orange uh bars on the graph here, which stand for very good and good respectively.

Most of our services are rated by uh in those one of those two categories by 70 percent of the respondents, showing that the stakeholders who pay for these services are generally very happy with the services that we are providing.

So a quick high level overview of the 2027 and 2020 through 2029 operations plan.

Um so four primary changes.

So one uh we're proposing to increase the area wide assessment by three percent for the first year in FY 2027, bringing our total budget to 1.5 million dollars, which will include snowmelt funds.

Uh this 3% will also apply to the resident flat rate, uh bringing their annual flat rate to 124 dollars.

Uh we're proposing excuse me, an area wide assessment increase of four percent, both in fiscal year 28 and 29.

So our plan uh ties these percentage increases to the state inflation rate multiplier.

They also cap them at 4%, so we always project the cap, knowing that we can walk the budget back later, but we can't go up should we under forecast what we think our budget needs.

And then we're uh proposing to expand the DID service boundaries to include the newly constructed amphitheater.

So there on the screen you'll see a new map with the new area highlighted in red, and then we're proposing to maintain the snowmelt assessment uh as a flat rate for the three years of the plan.

And then, really quick, what is the process for getting the assess special assessment approved?

So the DID board and DGRI staff develop the operating plan for the improvement district.

It outlines our overall services, the geographic boundaries where we're going to provide these services, and then a projected cost that go along with these services.

The board will recommend this plan to commission, which is where we are today.

The commission reviews the plan and conducts a public hearing, which is what we're here to set.

The commission will vote on the reauthorization and extension of this plan, which will go back to the board who will approve, and then ultimately DJI will administer the DID plan.

The operating plan is routinely reaffirmed.

We're typically on a three-year schedule right now.

Uh however, I will remind everyone that the budget is reviewed and approved by the city commission annually.

And with that, I'm happy to take any questions you all might have.

Thank you so much.

Um thank you for highlighting this.

I always appreciate something that is step by step so we know what's in front of us.

Uh thanks for the overview and um the update as it relates to obviously the are we T minus not quite one month from the amphitheater's first show.

Yeah, it depends on how you count it, but yeah, we're pretty close.

We're pretty close.

So I know that there has been a lot of work and a lot of communications.

I want to say thank you to the board members.

I want to say thank you.

I know Miss Baron serves on that body as well.

Um, and appreciate you know the the connection points and the partnership.

Sometimes it's not always clear to the public sort of where the city starts and ends, where do you all start and end, where do our corridor improvement start?

So I think it's um you really laid that out very nicely as a good reference for those that are just looking to learn more.

So um colleagues question, city manager, would you like to add anything?

Uh nothing else to add.

Okay.

Um Commissioner Knight.

Yes, thank uh thank you for that uh presentation.

Just a question.

Um I have been talking with um uh some of our members of public safety, and we were talking about uh working with the hot team and keeping the downtown together, and I remember we um came up with the the plan to help store items for um our unhoused population, and my understanding is that um some of that funding is coming to an end, and just wondering if you all are planning to help support that moving forward.

Uh it's not laid out in this particular operations plan, but I think we would welcome the conversation and potentially discuss any opportunities to support that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Uh Commissioner Belchuk.

Hi, yes, thank you for being here.

Um so I have a couple of things, but do you happen to know offhand how many total properties are it's approximately 600 or so.

Okay, that would be assessed essentially.

Correct.

Um I I hear sometimes from neighbors, they're like, why can't we get snow shoveling help or something like that?

And so um what I'm hearing is that this this special service area is what gets the the current help.

Um is there anything else that I'm missing in that city manager with okay?

So when we when people see things out there, it it really is coming from a special assessment that they've had in their own particular area.

Correct, yes.

Yes, they are taxing themselves to to be able to do this, and um, I think even you know, kind of um sharing some of the pieces with nonprofit organizations because there's certainly a number in this in this boundaries as well.

So I know that was a question a couple years ago.

I know um, and so thank you for outlining kind of what the difference is in that assessment.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Purdue.

Good morning.

Nice to see you again.

Melvin, um, a few questions.

Um generally speaking, can you can you speak to uh where your budget kind of those general buckets and line items and the majority of your you know it's 30% of your budget spent on snow melt versus promotions kind of those categories that are on um those survey categories that you talked about, you know.

So I don't have the exact percentage breakdown, but uh by and large the the majority of the budget goes to maintenance and operations, uh primarily to support the ambassador team that provides most of those services as well as things like uh maintenance and operation fund to fix and repair infrastructure under our purview.

The snowmelt um has its own separate assessment from the general assessment.

So if you are a property that borders snowmelt, you receive both a general assessment and a snowmelt assessment, and we only spend snowmelt assessment dollars on the snowmelt.

So if you're a property that's not adjacent to snowmelt, none of the assessment that you pay pays into the snowmelt fund.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, and then uh part of this will be uh expanding the area um of the DID.

Uh so you know that's really great, especially because you all provide enhanced services that the city is not um able to do.

Um my question really is um more for city manager.

Um by expanding the service area um of the DID, what how if how might that impact our tax revenue?

Does that change what we capture?

No, is it simply an advantage?

No, yeah, this is not uh tax increment.

This is a special assessment that they're agreeing to pay in addition to all their already uh existing tax obligations.

So it doesn't have an impact on our revenue.

Thanks.

That was my question.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Yes.

Well, while uh Melvin's here and I see Tim Kelly in the back, I do want to uh thank downtown Grand Rapids Inc.

for their partnership with the city as was stated in helping us do things we could not normally do on our own, but uh specifically I want to acknowledge all the ambassadors who uh see around downtown, uh akin to our refuse workers and many of our workers in parks have have very challenging jobs, but they do it with smile with a smile and with uh enthusiasm, and it's not always easy.

And so I want uh you to let them know how much I really appreciate their work and look forward to uh their continued partnership, and hopefully this will get uh approved.

Yeah, thank you for that.

I'll pass it along to them.

Thank you, City Manager.

Commissioner Kilgar.

Yes, thank you, madam president.

Uh okay.

I have two questions.

Uh, first being uh we're talking a lot about D uh your uh snow melt.

Yeah.

Uh so if you could let me know uh what type of snow melt you're using.

Sure.

Uh or de-icers, are they um is this assault-based or snow melt is uh infrastructure built into the street that uses primarily steam and uh water to run through tubing that heats the sidewalk so it that nobody has to shovel or use salt or any deal.

So it's the in bed.

It's the inbedder yes.

The this is majority this like upkeep for that.

Yeah, yeah.

So it costs money obviously to operate the the snowmelt, and then obviously uh there's maintenance and operations that go into fixing it, repairing it, maintaining it, making sure that it operates as we expect it to every year when we have to turn it on for uh winter.

Yeah, that's an awesome feature.

Wish I could have that at my house.

Um thank you so much for clarifying that.

And then uh to uh I had a follow-up question to Commissioner Knight's question.

So if that storage for our unhouse neighbors is not included uh in this current budget, could you walk me through uh why you all decided that it's not in place of why didn't that uh become a part of sure it would it simply was not an ask of the improvement district at the time we were drafting the plan.

Yep.

So we were unaware that there was any request or desire to have those services in the operations plan.

Yep.

So thank you.

May I may uh thank you respond to Commissioner Kilgore's question.

So uh the uh storage program is an evolving um situation, and we've only recently I've only recently become aware of um that need over the past month or so.

And so we're considering uh some of the options in the budget process, and we'll have an opportunity to talk about how to sustain that service.

I think it's an important one, and we've talked to other community partners beyond the DID, some of the philanthropic uh groups in uh in the area to see if they're too wishing to partner on that, but uh we'll have to make some some decisions doing our budget process.

Thank you so much, city manager.

So is that something that you all would be willing to partner with the city on going forward?

I think we'd be open to the conversation.

I can't speak on behalf of the board, but we can certainly have the conversation and and if if it aligns with what we're our our operations plan, we can bring it to the board for their consideration and approval.

Great.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And thanks for those questions, colleagues.

I think um, you know, we're embarking on a uh new time in this city, so it's like you said you're gonna expand or you know, the intention is to expand that district.

Um so we'll have a whole new set of circumstances.

Um we talked at a previous committee of the whole as it related to costs associated with the uh the crosswalk, which you know, we have to have our sworn uniform officers at the crosswalks.

Um, you know, we have this beautiful uh fully automated crosswalk out here in Monroe.

Um, but that you know is going to be a cost that we're gonna uh be managing and then looking at um, you know, what other things exist and just where people are are going and so I think that I would remind us all too.

It might not, you know, maybe the ask is for one thing, but um I would say, you know, in my past experience working with um your body and Mr.

Kelly is it might maybe you know I always say that the ask doesn't have to necessarily be binary, it could be you know, hey, we need this, but there might be other things that we need to fund and maybe it's better better suited or makes more sense for the DID to come in.

So I I would say let's remind ourselves all of those that conversation as well.

And I see shaking heads.

Um so I I really appreciate that, and uh, let's definitely keep this conversation going.

We know we have Miss Barons at that table as well.

So um anything to add, City Manager?

All right, and I'm hearing and seeing no other questions.

So anything else that you'd like to add?

Okay.

I'll set thank you.

All right, wonderful.

So I'm gonna go ahead and call the question again or reminder.

This is to set the public hearing at um the next meeting that we have on the 28th.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Item carries.

Thanks so much.

Thanks for the presentation.

Thank you to everybody else who's here on behalf.

See Ryan and Tim there.

Thank you.

All right.

Our last resolution of the day is a resolution for uh the recently appointed city attorney Philip Strom to affirm the oath of office and authorizing execution of an employee agreement.

So moved and supported.

Um and I see Miss Eddie from our human resources department or one of our human resources leader coming forward um to just share a little bit about this item.

As you all re recall, now we can take the interim off of this title, so it's not a clumsy title for me to refer to you, Mr.

Strom, and was appointed unanimously by this body, including the mayor, uh, just uh about a few weeks ago.

So I'm gonna turn over to you to share more about next steps.

Thank you, and good morning.

My name is Michelle Eddy, deputy HR director here.

Um April 1st, the city commission voted to appoint Philip Strom Strom to the permanent position of city attorney.

Mr.

Strom has been serving as interim city attorney since September of 2025.

Mr.

Strom has affirmed the oath of office during his interim appointment and will reaffirm his oath of office today, April 14, 2026.

On April 1st, 2026, the city commission authorized the parties to negotiate the terms of an employment agreement.

The parties have negotiated an employment agreement establishing the salary levels and fringe benefits.

The city has represented was represented in negotiation by the HR department and outside legal council, Foster Swift.

Mayor LeGran was included in the initial review of the proposed employment agreement.

The agreement reflects an effective date of April 1st, 2026, and will run through December 31st, 2028.

The salary benefits will be in accordance with the salary ordinance for appointed officials passed in 2025.

Mr.

Strom will be compensated at the D step of the city attorney approved salary contained in the salary ordinance.

Mr.

Strom will receive retroactive pay reflecting the new salary benefit back to April 1st, 2026.

The employment agreement is modeled after the prior city attorney agreement and employment agreements are already in place for the city's other appointed officials.

Thank you, Miss Eddie.

I'll just add that um yes, um previously worked with Foster Swift on the other um contracts.

The three-year contract is is very customary, and thank you for outlining some of those other pieces.

So colleagues, do you have any questions?

I know I had a chance to talk to the mayor about this item as well since he wasn't here.

Um but feel very confident in where we're at and getting this official official.

Okay.

Hearing and seeing no other comments.

Um, all those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Item carries.

And then Mr.

Clerk has a comment about the swearing in.

Yeah, so for the for the oath of office for Mr.

Strom, that's gonna take place at the very end of our two o'clock meeting.

So for those that are wanting to be here to see that um and participate or um be in the audience, just be aware at the end of our um very end of the meeting, we'll go into an oath of office ceremony.

All right, well, will refreshments be provided?

No.

You can have the fill of everything you bring yourself.

All right, okay.

Well, touche.

Um, but congratulations and I look forward to this next step.

And I know that um had a chance to talk to some other uh city staff and excitement.

Do you want to add anything?

Uh just to say thank you uh to you all, thank you to my wife who's here in the front row and works for the treasurer's office and for my family for supporting me through that process that was really good for the community, good for the office.

Um I may have some more very short remarks.

I look forward to uh rather informal oath of office uh to reaffirm my commitment to the city and just roll up my sleeves and get back to work.

Thank you.

Thank you so much and thanks for the updates.

So that is a good segue um because we are gonna need to go into a closed session immediately following this committee of the whole.

So let's go ahead and need a resolution to go into that closed session.

Uh okay.

Um, and this is for two pending litigation matters.

So if uh it can have a motion.

So moved.

And this is a roll call vote.

Commissioner Kilgore, yes, Commissioner Knight.

Yes.

Commissioner Purdue.

Yes.

Mr.

Belchuk.

Yes.

President Asasi.

Yes.

Yes.

All right, that carries, and we'll go into that immediately in 601, Mr.

Strom.

Okay.

All right.

So let's uh transition to our briefings for today.

We have two, they're always important, uh, but you know, I would say housing is probably the number one thing that many of us up here are asked about on a regular basis.

It seems not like not that long ago, where we were discussing the Affordable Housing Fund Board when we were in the the depths of COVID, and now we are here and it's had many iterations and a lot of work.

I'll just say before I um turn it over.

Upper left.

Oh.

Oh, we are.

Yep.

You snuck it in there, Mr.

Kane.

Um, and so just before we get started, I know uh um city manager and and deputy city manager also share this, but thank you to the people who were those initial folks who said, you know, we're not sure what this body is gonna look like.

This is the goal.

Will you come to the table?

And I want to just say a lot of appreciation to those board members and also to the staff.

There's a lot of staff work that goes into these committees.

There's not just like putting out the agenda.

So I'll turn over to you, city manager, if you want to share anything before Miss Barron starts.

Thank you, uh, Commissioner.

And I too want to um share my gratitude to the staff, and I see some of the um board members here today.

Um I I want to say uh putting this in context.

Both of these conversations today.

While we're not making any uh budget decisions, you'll have our ample opportunity for that.

These will uh help us frame some of the future conversations we'll need to have in the coming weeks around uh both topics.

So I appreciate the work today and looking forward to hearing your your feedback.

Thank you so much.

And so we'll turn over to you, Miss Bearin.

All right, thank you.

Uh I am joined today in the presentation by Ryan Kilpatrick, who has been helping to support the staff work of the board uh to uh some really great impacts and uh education for our board, as well as I do want to appreciate Mr.

Chris Romero who is here on behalf of the board.

So the uh chair and co-chair were unable to fit this particular meeting into their schedule.

So Mr.

Romero is here in the event you need a board perspective on any of the items to just quickly I won't read off the name.

Yes.

I'm a board member too.

Your name is displayed here, sir.

I didn't want to uh put you on the spot though.

You can bring some snacks to the Clis Wearing N to make the I'm just giving you a hard time, Ms.

Barrens.

There you go.

Uh okay, so I won't read off all the names, but uh these are the current members of the board.

Uh we have had a couple people roll off the board as well.

Uh Mr.

Jim Talon, I do want to recognize as the first chair of the board was very helpful in his uh guidance and wisdom in working through some of the investments that we preliminarily made.

Uh I just wanted to highlight the policy again, not gonna read these all off, uh, but this is the foundational policy for the Affordable Housing Fund Board.

The idea of having a separate fund governed by a separate board really came out of a lot of work that we um presented to the commission back in, I feel like it was November of 24 at this point, sort of uh commenting on the work and focus that the City of Grand Rapids has had on housing and housing affordability since really uh the early 2000s.

Um but Great Housing or Housing Now and Great Housing Strategies really pointed out the idea of having a separate fund and a separate board to govern that, and that was ultimately memorialized in this uh policy in front of you.

Just a reminder that this is actually a separate fund.

It is held by uh the community foundation, and we have an agreement with the community foundation that lays out a few of those features.

It's a donor directed fund.

Uh we are required to keep a minimum of 250,000 dollars in the fund at all times.

Um and then they invested on our behalf, and we have rules about how how we draw funds out of that and and how that all works, which is won't get into the details.

Um at a big picture level, I do want to emphasize that the affordable housing uh fund is intended really when we're talking about rental housing to focus on AMIs of 80 percent and below area median income.

And when we're talking about homeownership, the policy does acknowledge there are some additional challenges there.

So, again, focusing on a hundred percent and below.

So that's a little bit different than some of our other incentive programs that allow to go up to 120 percent AMI.

Um, the board has a lot of uh duties related to investing the funds, but an above and beyond that, and kind of the focus of today's conversation is also uh the encouragement or the ability to do two things grow the fund.

So think about strategies to grow the fund and uh think about different policy objectives that the that they might want to uh recommend to the city commission.

So I did just want to hit quickly on the investments that have happened to date.

So uh since the board came together in 2023, uh one of their main areas of focus was to come to a set of recommendations around 500 or 500 million.

That would have solved a lot more problems.

Five million dollars worth of American uh rescue plan act or ARPA dollars that were channeled through uh this fund to make recommendations specifically about affordable housing.

So that came to the city commission in 2023, I want to say.

That uh, because of the board's focus on housing building housing at scale, it really is much more efficient for project applicants to have sort of one process where we can braid together the available funds uh that can help fill out a capital stack.

So the uh neighborhood investment plan process, as you are aware, includes a number of different uh colors of money uh that can be used for uh various affordable housing objectives.

The affordable housing fund dollars are braided with that and evaluated by our staff and by a subcommittee of the board to to come up with recommendations, and you've uh received a complete briefing about that as part of the fiscal year 27 neighborhood investment plan briefing that you received a couple weeks ago.

Um so you see some totals on the screen there, so really um great impacts that we're seeing from the affordable housing fund in the three funding rounds um that have been considered to date.

Uh so with that, there has been additional work that the board has been working on.

So really we grounded the board in some strategic planning early on in their constitution, and as I said, they developed some strategic strategic objectives.

Uh they can sort of review the whole housing spectrum and and work and consider uh applying the fund in a whole bunch of different areas.

If you read that policy that that founded them in detail.

Uh so we we wanted to have an opportunity to talk to the board about what their priorities were given that ability to sort of focus on a lot of things.

Um at that time, the board confirmed that they really wanted to be focusing on generating affordable housing units at scale.

I think that makes a lot of sense.

It is in line with a lot of what we see, just given the number of units that really are needed in this region at all affordability levels, um, wanting to do the most with and leverage the most is a is a reasonable thing to focus on.

They did confirm focusing on the 80% and below AMI, which is within their policy, but also good to remember where these kinds of dollars can fit in and do the most good, uh, where you might have the most challenges from a financial standpoint to make a capital stack work versus where incentives can do more of the work, which is in that 80 to 120 percent AMI.

Uh the board did confirm it's also important to make sure that we are continuing to provide home ownership opportunities.

So, again, when you think about the colors of money that exists, public fund funding that exists in particular, that tends to be very focused on rental units.

Uh, and that is partially efficiency, partially the economics of it, partially the way the incentives work.

Uh but the board did want to note that for a healthy housing market, we need all of those uh opportunities at as many income levels as possible.

Uh so homeownership is still something they deliberately try to include in their funding recommendations moving forward.

And then emerging developers.

So, again, this is a conversation we're having in many fronts uh of city policy, but just noting that the more we can diversify not just the type of housing but who's producing the housing, that again helps build out a more robust ecosystem to generate housing units.

So we need different housing types.

You've seen zoning policy on that front and different housing types at smaller scale means we need different um vendors is not the word I'm searching for, different developers and different construction companies who are able to work at that scale and make it work.

Uh so that's kind of a pipeline side of the solution.

Uh and then finally, as part of the early work that we did with the board in 23 and 24, they noted that they wanted to do some work outside of the board meetings through these subcommittees.

So one uh is named the emerging opportunities subcommittee, and one is grow the fund.

We don't have a formal report today from the emerging opportunities subcommittee, but just be aware they uh meet about quarterly, and usually we are informing that group of things that are kind of percolating that may eventually lead to investment opportunities, whether it's uh to provide a little bit of seed money to encourage others to fund an idea or a pilot or a program that might generate housing or housing stability.

Um, for example, you're going to hear more or you have heard a report from the ADU task force.

You're gonna hear more about recommendations on how to implement some of the ideas out of that report.

We will provide a similar update to the emerging opportunities group, and if there's something where an investment from the fund might be appropriate, then we work with this subcommittee to prevent some present something to the full board.

Um so the grow the fund subcommittee is really the report we're focusing on today.

So that group again met uh quarterly and talked about a number of ideas that I'm going to turn the mic over to Mr.

Kilpatrick to walk you through that ended up culminating in a recommendation that we have in front of you today.

Uh so we'll go into more detail about the various tools that the subcommittee considered in terms of ways to grow funding for affordable housing and then potentially the role of the fund itself in those different tools.

Uh and ultimately the recommendation is there's there's a couple strategies that we think are worthy of additional due diligence.

That due diligence at this point largely does require us to start speaking to people outside of the room.

So there was a lot of internal to the subcommittee and internal to the board conversation to this point.

Uh and now we would need to vet some ideas with outside stakeholders.

We did not want to do that without this body hearing the report and understanding what those next steps would be and being comfortable enough with the use of staff time and board time to engage in those conversations, knowing that at this point we're not asking for an endorsement of any of these tools.

We're asking for the head nod that yes, please keep working on these ideas.

So with that, I'm gonna turn it over to Mr.

Kilpatrick to give you a little bit more idea about what's been considered, and then we'll circle back looking for that head nod or answer any questions that you have.

Thank you, Miss Barons.

Welcome, Mr.

Kilpatrick.

Thank you very much.

Important to note that all of this research is rooted in some of the original documentation in the process of creating the Affordable Housing Fund Board, which happened in I think 2021.

Dr.

Virginia Beard is a member of the board.

She's a professor at Hope College and helped contribute to the body of research that informs our presentation today and the report that you should have, as well as the initial creation and founding of the Affordable Housing Fund.

So what we really wanted to do is evaluate what are other communities across the country doing.

How does it work for them?

What are some of the best practices?

And of those best practices, what feels like we could import it into the city of Grand Rapids in an efficient and effective way.

So this bulleted list highlights those tools and mechanisms that other communities are using across the country, the municipal bonding authority, property tax measures, fee-based approaches.

I'll talk through each of these individually, give you kind of a high-level summary of what we found, and then end this with a quick summary review of where we think we're headed.

So when we talk about municipal bonds, I know you have all been talking about municipal bonds relative to big infrastructure items.

There are two ways that we can talk about municipal bonds.

One is a general obligation bond, which pledges the full faith in credit of the city and requires a source of revenue to pay the bond down.

Generally, that's some form of taxes, right?

So it's either an increase in taxes or it's a dedication of some amount of the general fund to pay down that bond obligation.

So that's a big decision and it requires a vote of the people.

The other opportunity is a revenue bond, which does not pledge the full faith in credit of the city.

It does use a bonding authority and it uses the revenue from the property that gets built to pay down the debt service.

So just like a traditional commercial loan, if you build a commercial building, you're gonna rent out that building to a tenant.

The tenant will pay that rent, which helps you pay down the loan.

So the opportunity with a revenue bond is it's generally financed at a point or two below traditional interest rates.

So you're getting a lower interest rate than you would get if you went to the bank.

And a revenue bond can finance up to 100% of the of a project cost.

So normally when we're financing something with commercial debt, commercial debt gets limited at about 80% of total project cost, and then you've got to go find 20% equity.

So you need to have an investor that's willing to put their money up.

More often than not, an investor wants a pretty significant return on their investment in exchange for the risk that they're taking on putting the money into the project.

So you end up spending a lot more on that private uh investment or equity than you would have to if you can finance a project at a hundred percent leverage.

Now, some of the challenges are you are still committing dollars from the city's bonding authority, and that counts against you if you wanted to bond for something else, whether it's infrastructure or something else.

You can only bond for so much money, and and Molly can explain that in much more detail than I can.

But you can use the bonding authority of other entities like the Economic Development Corporation, the Housing Authority, or you could partner with the Michigan State Housing Development Authority and use their bonding authority.

They have triple A credit rating, they have a very big bond rating.

So there are opportunities to leverage partners here.

What's important about revenue bonds though is that you have to have enough revenue from the project that you're building to pay down the debt service.

And so you'll note with a general obligation bond, what you would have is property tax that pays down the bond.

So you could rent or sell housing to very low-income residents with no income or 30% AMI and below.

With a revenue bond, the the building that you build or buy to preserve has to produce enough revenue to pay down the debt service, which means you're probably gonna be limited to households earning in the 60 to 100% AMI range.

Or you could pair a revenue bond with a 4% low-income housing tax credit, where you're getting some low-income housing, some kind of middle income workforce housing.

But that's the big limiter on the revenue bond is it's got to be able to produce enough revenue to pay down the debt service.

So just want you to have that in the back of your mind as we go forward.

So paired with a general obligation bond or separately, um, we did explore the opportunity of a property tax measure or a millage.

This is a significant opportunity and comes with a lot of political capital that has to be spent, right?

We've got the vital streets millage, we've got the parks millers, there's lots of things that the city can spend money on using millage dollars, but there's probably a ceiling to which the voters are willing to commit to more and more property tax measures.

And so while I think it's probably worth continuing to pursue, the threshold over which you have to overcome a vote of the people is something that's gonna take a lot more time.

And so it's not a short-term recommendation, it's a long-term, let's continue to make sure that this is a priority of the public and keep that on the list of things to continue to talk about.

I think Housing Kent is hosting conversations about this on a regular basis, but it wasn't something that we said was a short-term recommendation as a result of the housing fund board's review.

Tax agreement financing is another tool.

I think the city's already using very well.

Um the recent state legislation that allows for tax increment finance to be used for housing under the Brownfield Act has been pivotal.

Um the economic development department has been using this with pretty significant success.

I should note, I meant to say this at the top.

The affordable housing fund is one tool among many that is helping the city to achieve its goals for housing.

So the planning department has been doing a lot to revise and amend the zoning code to make it easier to build more and more diverse housing.

The community development department has a very streamlined approach to using federal pass through dollars as well as city dollars and allocating those on a consistent basis.

And the economic development department is using all of the tools available to it to maximize affordability wherever it can.

So the affordable housing fund fits within those other three strategies.

We're not gonna solve all of our housing needs with this one tool, but when we start to pair it with other tools, that's when it becomes really impactful.

So one of the things to note is we can pair tax increment financing with revenue bonds, where we could say if we were able to use a revenue bond plus uh housing TIFF, we can start to lower the uh affordability, essentially make more affordable housing to more people available if we can pair those two sources.

So 100% financing plus tax increment finance reimbursement starts to make housing a bit more affordable.

The other important thing to note is we do have other tax increment finance jurisdictions, we've got our corridor improvement authorities, we've got the DDA.

Those tax increment finance authorities also have the ability to invest in housing.

So we can start to pair all of these things.

There's only so much tax increment that gets created as a result of development, but we do have multiple sources to pursue there.

Public-private partnerships is the other big one.

Um this is one that we don't want to lose sight of.

We want to continue to pursue.

Essentially, what this means is we want to pull in more corporate funding, more philanthropic funding, we want to align it with city resources.

In some instances, we would like them to invest in the housing fund.

What we're finding right now when we talk to philanthropy, when we talk to corporate partners, philanthropy already has the things that they're investing in, right?

So we've got lots of philanthropic families who are giving to housing already, and they'll say, you know what, we really care about these two or three things, and we're gonna continue to invest in those things.

But philanthropy also says we want to know what the affordable housing fund is doing, and when we can, we want to align with the dollars that the affordable housing fund is spending.

We don't want to replicate or duplicate.

What we want to do is say, okay, the affordable housing funds swim lane is here, philanthropy wants to sit right next to that and solve the next largest gap, right?

But what they're not saying today is, oh yeah, we just want to put all of our philanthropic capital into the affordable housing fund and let a public body decide how we're gonna spend private philanthropy.

Currently, we don't have the track record to have philanthropy say, great, let's just give you all the money and let the affordable housing fund decide how to divvy it up.

Most of our philanthropic partners are saying we're happy to partner.

So when the Affordable Housing Fund Board or other partners say, hey, we've identified these gaps in the ecosystem, we know we need to fund these two or three things as top priorities.

Philanthropy will come alongside of the affordable housing fund, but probably won't invest significantly into it unless what we're able to do is say, hey, there are two or three priorities that the fund board really wants to pursue.

Maybe it's wealth creation for first-time homeowners.

Um, maybe it's the emerging developer initiative, something like that.

Those are the kinds of initiatives, small-scale pilot initiatives where there isn't competition in the marketplace right now.

I think those are the kinds of things we could probably leverage more philanthropic investment into the fund.

Hopefully, over time, we can build more of a track record and it becomes a much more trusted resource where if we have philanthropic partners who say, hey, we don't want to become experts in housing.

The Affordable Housing Fund is our community expert.

We'll invest a certain amount of capital into the fund, knowing that it's going to be well stewarded.

That's the track record that we want to build over time.

I think we've got a little more work to do to get there.

The other one is special assessment districts.

We see this work well in some communities.

In Michigan, most of our special assessment districts are limited to a small share of an assessment, right?

So you could do a 1% property tax assessment in a defined limited geographic scope, you don't end up producing a lot of additional tax revenue, keeping in mind that the cost to build one new unit of housing is generally around 180 to 200,000.

The amount of special assessed area and increment that you have to produce is significant.

You might get one or two housing units a year with a special assessment district.

And so again, to spend all the political capital necessary to convince all of the property owners to contribute another one or two percent to a special assessment district, and then say, and good news the result is we're gonna have two more homes.

That's a tough lift, right?

So uh for the purposes of this exercise, we suggested the special assessment district is probably more work than it's worth at this particular stage.

Um and with that, I'm gonna pass this back to deputy manager Kate Barrens to talk about conclusions.

Thank you.

All right, so uh as Ryan alluded to and the Affordable Housing Fund Board heard this report from the subcommittee, had a discussion and came up with their recommendation on next steps.

So we're really focused here on the short-term next steps.

Um, and so that is really looking at those the idea of that revenue bond idea, filling some gaps in a capital stack for that 60% and above AMI.

Um, we are suggest the board is recommending that as part of that effort, we try to look at all of the the information that's out there about the housing needs at various income levels and really zero in on sort of a target that we think could be achieved with this kind of tool so that we would be positioned to be able to have that next phase conversation.

Um this would require us to do some work both internally but also then talking to stakeholders as uh Ryan presented.

The idea of a revenue bond could be issued by a number of different types of entities.

Uh so we would want to be talking to those entities.

Uh that would be the EDC or the local land bank or the housing commission, just in terms of how might this fit in the portfolio of work that what that those entities are doing.

So that work would allow us to think about, you know, how feasible is this from the perspective of the partners that would need to join into an effort like this.

What do we think it could generate in terms of capital?

Uh, and where how close would that be to a reasonable target that we try to define through that work of looking at the information that exists about housing needs?

I do want to say that longer term the board still does believe that a millage approach may be something that is more sustainable over time, but felt like this kind of work, so continually sort of demonstrating to the public we are being creative, we are using all the tools that are in the toolbox, we're using those tools effectively, and there's still a gap, uh, would be a long-term good strategy to build that sort of public understanding, public awareness, public trust.

Uh so I'd say long-term, that's uh in the board's recommendation as well.

But we really wanted to focus in on what we can do in the next period of time.

I'm not committing to a specific period of time, you just noted to me say period of time, uh, because I'm not quite sure where our stakeholders will be, so we haven't started any of that conversation yet.

Um, but we we want to focus on these three things over that next period of time.

Um, and we'll report back if this board uh this body is okay with us kind of starting that next phase of due diligence, then we would report back along the way as we learn more.

So, with that, happy to answer any questions or uh take the go forth and conquer or any concerns you might have.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thanks for this review again.

This doesn't seem like that long ago, but this was long ago.

And um, again, thinking through all the folks that have been a part of this, the different conversations.

Um, I'll just I'll make a quick comment.

Um, just because the top of the mind as we think about emerging issues, they're constantly emerging on April 3rd.

The White House put out the fiscal year 27 budget that um has significant deep cuts, um, at least right now, you know, it'll probably change, but um, hopefully for the better, but we don't know, but deep cuts to both HUD and um community development block grants, as well as, and we didn't really talk about financing, but I'll hold that question, but also to community development financial institutions who are who um many provide additional financing for projects, you know, like we may be thinking about or wanting to focus on.

So I think that's you know, very near term, and so I'm glad that you all have that committee because when we were thinking about this in 21, it was more like we have this one-time dollars to try to, you know, everybody's like, we're gonna fix everything with this, and then you're like, when you start really looking at the tens of millions or you know, it it it only can go so far.

I know a lot of our focus was on shovel ready projects, really trying to figure in those gaps.

And so um just wanted to share that because that to me is is deeply concerning as we move forward, and you know, where do we come in?

And you mentioned uh Mr.

Kilpatrick, you know, the good work of a couple of different department and department leaders who you know I know are very connected and coordinated, not only with all of you, but with each other and trying to understand how do we maximize this this um ecosystem.

So I'll just that's my little soapbox, and um, I'm gonna turn over to my colleagues.

Did I see your hand raised, Commissioner Purdue?

Thank you.

And then Commissioner Belchak, thank you.

Good morning.

Thank you both so much for the presentation.

Um this is exciting.

This is the stuff I like to see when you're looking to braid various tools, funds, and financing to solve a really, really big issue.

So thank you so much for all the work of the board, the staff, like all the work that went into this.

This is really exciting, and I think we'll move the needle.

Um, and so I'm just really glad that we're here.

Um, so I'm really super head nod, obviously.

Like, let's do this.

Um, let's go forward and see um what's most feasible, where do we start?

Um I have two questions though, more so out of just clarity and curiosity.

Uh, the first one is uh on page 11 of the presentation, Ryan, when you talked about tax increment financing, that third bullet.

Um, the city, the affordable housing fund, and each authority would need to collaborate to create a citywide plan.

You kind of talked about that a little bit in your remarks.

Could you just speak a little bit more about what that will look like, how complicated that might get, or how do you anticipate it'll be relatively straightforward?

I'm just wondering how you see that potentially working.

Yeah, so I I think there's a few ways to do that.

We could make it very complicated, which is exciting for those of us who are nerds.

Um, but we could also do it pretty simply.

And the the idea generally is to think about what are our target goals, right?

What are we trying to achieve in terms of number of units and price points?

Um, and can we make those goals realistic for the capital that we know we will have available to us?

But then also thinking about how do we partner with our corridor improvement authorities with the places that the planning department has outlined for growth, right?

We have a pretty good sense of where we have opportunities for infill development that aren't gonna disrupt the neighborhood character of established places.

Um we're already planning for transit opportunities.

We're already planning for the kinds of investment that the community wants to see.

Thinking about how do we braid and layer those funds in those specific places, but then also thinking about how do we catalyze market rate development that we can leverage to support more affordability, right?

And so as if we're thinking about a corridor improvement district, um, when we have market rate development that needs 10-15 years of TIFF in order to make the project work, um, there's an opportunity to capture those last 10 years when it's adjacent and contiguous to offset costs for an adjacent and contiguous property.

So you can do market rate and affordable side by side and leverage the market rate to do the affordable.

We just did a version of this with Habitat for Humanity on the Lake Shore.

Those kinds of things have to be coordinated, right?

You have to be strategic about how you're gonna do it.

Private developer has to be on board with those kinds of things, but you do have the opportunity where we can say, hey, this is a place where people are gonna invest no matter what.

Let's leverage that market rate development in order to get more affordability over time.

Thank you.

And I think you said something really important, and that is we need to set goals around the number of units and the price points and where they go.

I think we have this, we understand we need a lot of housing units, we need to get really specific of what are our metrics, what are our goals, where, and what's everyone's role in doing that to make it realistic.

Um the second question I have is on on slide 13 related to special assessment districts.

Um I'm just wondering, so I know that there has been a lot of conversation in community with when folks are amendable to a millage, for example.

I mean, folks were have been talking about that for a few years.

And so I'm wondering if it's possible for residents who might live in a neighborhood or part of town to say we want to create this special assessment district and spearhead that more of kind of this grassroots mobilization effort to then connect with this opportunity if they know that that demand is there for that special, you know, for the area that they're in.

Is that something that can be resident led?

Um, or is that something that uh typically needs to float through the city processes and follow city leadership?

Well, both and so it could be resident led in terms of a request, but then this body would have to take action to allow that to be formed.

Yeah.

Um, and I think as Mr.

Kilpatrick was saying, part of that due diligence would be us helping the the resident group understand what you could really get out of a special assessment district to meet those goals.

So um, and then they the conclusion may be maybe that's not enough, or may you know, but the residents would have that information then to be able to decide whether they wanted to tax themselves for that increment.

But again, the amount of increment is relatively low, so it may be a relatively small addition.

Yeah.

I was just I'm asking from the perspective of uh this takes time, and if some folks are like ready to go, what might we be able to offer them if they want to organize?

Um so thank you so much.

Excited to see this move forward and see uh these ideas far further develop and come with some some concrete recommendations.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Belchuk.

Thank you.

Um I kind of have a few things, so I'm hoping we can work through these.

Um I also wanted to start on page 11 and and the tax increment financing.

Um I'm glad we've had the discussion that we've had so far because I find that when I'm out in the community and I'm thinking of um folks and in particular, I've been to a couple of meetings recently with Together West Michigan, and I think that that is a group that I would encourage folks to reach out to from the housing board because um there's a lot of misunderstanding of what tax increment financing and what public dollars are and how they're being used or not used, how they can be used.

Um and so right now there's a discussion and priority setting happening out in the community for how people want to try to get organized to help and facilitate these kinds of things.

So I would love to see some partnership there so that we get the right information to the right people and have people understand that this is just one tool in a lot of toolbox that we are trying to develop.

But right now, I think that uh past discussions around, say, the three towers project really has put a fire under a lot of our community.

And I would be curious to know from your perspective how you would maybe address some of the tax finance stuff and how you're seeing this whole thing, like as we go out into the public and we try to say, yes, our affordable housing fund is doing something, here's why it's taking so long, and what we need to do next, because the the need is now, the need is yesterday.

And if we're looking at becoming a better city and not just stagnating in our like we're great, but we're not like I want to see us, and I think we all agree we want to see ourselves be like the cutting edge next hot place, and we're there, but if we don't keep the momentum going and keep people having places they can live and live with affordably, we're gonna be in in trouble.

So that's one piece of discussion that I would like to open up.

And um, if I and then I do want to say, yes, I think that we need to strongly work on this millage idea because I think there's enough potentially momentum when we're talking about people want this, and there's a lot of pointing, like what are you doing about it, City?

But this would be a way to say, look, we're all invested in this.

So I'm gonna open those two things and let you kind of give us some more information, uh, if you would please.

So, with respect to the uh housing TIFF in particular, so uh I think that was adopted in 22, 23, 24, 23.

Uh so the Brownfield Authority did adopt an interim policy related to housing TIFF.

They are currently kind of evaluating how that's working now.

So I don't want to uh get in front of that process, but just be aware that there is a conversation happening at the Brownfield Authority around what have we seen from the housing TIFF to date?

Is that getting us where we want to go?

Uh and speaking to to some of the other comments, the work that the board here is recommending to you on kind of refining our targets and our um what's reasonable to match which tool do we have to produce what type of housing, uh, I think can help support those conversations moving forward.

So more to come on housing TIFF and and whether there are refinements needed there and what those look like.

That's fair.

And you know, I am aware like the emerging developers program.

Um some of the the 15 or so projects that are in in the pipeline that are paused um are requiring 300,000 to 500,000 dollars more.

There's a gap in the financing for their stack to build these things, and these are people who are new to becoming a developer.

I see them largely coming from our communities, from our neighborhoods, and they want to be developing at the 60 percent, 80 percent, whereas you know larger, more established developers tend to want to be, you know, forward thinking in the market rate and profit and things.

I I just think it's a different zeitgeist for lack of a better idea.

So anything we can do to continue that would be great.

Thank you for your time.

Uh just in that one.

So I we didn't spend a lot of time on the emerging opportunities subcommittee of the board, but we did um have the economic development department presentation uh that was shared with the Brownfield Authority again on the first iteration of their emerging developer grants.

We shared that with our board and noted that as the conversation at the Brownfield Authority continues about sort of that program and how to to how whether when to continue that again takes more shape, we would be back in front of that committee to see if there's an opportunity for affordable housing fund funding to augment that uh uh commission?

No program.

Yes.

Uh simply uh thank you for the presentation.

Uh Mr.

Kilpatrick, I certainly think this was a fantastic example of how to present to the commission.

I thought it was succinct, I thought it was uh well thought out, and uh I will be directing our constituents back to see what what the work we're doing with this.

So thank you very much for your presentation and uh the feedback on moving forward on these points.

Uh thumbs up to please do so.

Thank you.

Any other questions, colleagues or comments?

Uh Sassi.

Thank you.

Um I just wanted to share um again that that conversation about uh mentioned Brownfield.

I have the opportunity to serve on Brownfield and also had the opportunity to be part of that committee was we were looking to how do we you know how do we use these incentives, how do we connect?

And so I know that um there has been a lot of work on that.

There's been a subcommittee who's worked on it.

We're trying to connect and understand from the emerging developer perspective.

Um and then, you know, I I think when there are these pieces here, there's also the other c the other costs of you know housing.

So you mentioned a little bit about transportation.

Um, you know, I don't know where the state of Michigan sits in terms of you know um home um insurance, but I know that sometimes we've heard stories of people who have foregone insurance and not protecting their largest asset, and so you know, would look forward to some of those conversations as well.

Um, as well as you know, I know Mr.

Romero, you you know previously worked at home repair services and just some of the work even for individuals, you know, we think about minor repairs, but sometimes those major repairs, we know that that is again how we're going to impact the housing stock, making sure people can stay in their home.

There's a lot of cultural, you know, uh pieces uh where people want to stay in their home until that last breath.

Um and so I just wanted to bring up those items as well, especially as we're thinking about some of the assessments and even if maybe an assessment, again, really big picture for residents, but I've heard a lot of questions about some of those repairs and some of the pieces, you know, particularly driveways, concrete work, siding, the things that um you know, some may be able to get financed and a zero percent finance, but others are not able to access that from a credit perspective.

So there's just a lot of those nuances.

So I appreciate you um talking about you know what is that additional cost for homeownership.

So I and then I'll just say I am supportive.

I think uh again, uh there's a lot of knowledge on that body, both those that are in um you know, doing direct work, have direct experiences as well as who are coming from that, you know, larger system perspective.

So thank you for the work.

So not having been here for the presentation, but having read it since I know how to read.

Um the uh the only thing I would like to add is as we move this conversation forward.

Um I think that it's uh I think it would be really fruitful for us to s to move away from talking about um uh percentage AMI because I think that really is an incomplete metric.

Um I think as we're about to shift to talking about the cap, um one of the ground level stats on carbon consumption is that if you live in a city you take about half the carbon footprint of if you don't.

Um I think a better metric for affordability generally um that would capture the virtue of living in a city would be to say um what percentage of your income are you spending on the housing plus transportation bundle and articulating that probably will help us focus on investing in areas where non-car transportation options are more viable because that's a huge savings.

Um so if people can uh be a one-car family or one and a half car family instead of a two-car family, um, that's thousands of dollars to get freed up for housing.

So I just want to make sure that we're using a slightly more complex metric, but I think one that ultimately then will get us better to our affordability goals, but also get us towards our environmental goals.

So just want to throw that out there.

We we uh the you know, five years ago, the the metric was constantly oh, if you're spending more than 30 percent of your income on housing, um, we've got a stressor, and that's not a bad rough cut, but I think we can do a better cut if we include the cost of transportation, because I think that's a real differentiator between living on Hall Street and living in ADA.

So thanks.

Yeah.

City Manager.

Yes, thank you.

Just to clarify.

So we we've talked about a lot of tools and I heard preferences in addition to uh some of the revenue bonding approaches that that uh we had talked about.

But I just want to clarify the recommendation from the board and the staff is to move forward looking at uh ways to scale uh potential revenue bonds as the first step.

I've heard several comments about millages and other tools, but uh the this this would be the premise of the work unless there's a different different preference.

Right.

Good summary.

I mean, we can't create a millage, uh millages or votes.

Um, but I do think it has to be part of the long-term conversation, as I think many of us do.

So great.

Yeah.

Sure.

Um, thank you, Mayor.

Um, so city manager, just for clarification, I want to just specify that my direction is absolutely to move forward with the bonding ideas.

I think that's a creative and useful thing.

And um I just want to piggyback on the AMI thing.

I think if there is something I'm looking for, a venue or a way, a pathway to be able to redefine how we discuss AMI.

I know HUD and you know our federal partners have to they use that census data, but it's my awareness that in the city, um, in the city limits, our our general incomes in the families are about 10 to 15,000 dollars less than what the AMI is, which is why people are feeling that affordability.

So even if we're building 80 percent AMI, we're really not building affordability inside the city limit.

That may be an applicable countywide.

So if there is another metric we can use in addition to AMI countywide that looks at neighborhood specific or city specific, I would be strongly in favor of that.

Mr.

Kilpatrick, you want to jump in here?

I I think it's valuable um if you just Google housing plus transportation index.

There's a national database that indicates by census tract what the typical household in that census tract is spending as a percentage of their income on housing and transportation.

And you can break them down independently.

So you can see in Grand Rapids to the point a lot of folks might be spending 23, 24, 25 percent of their income, in some cases 60 percent of their income on housing, but they're spending significantly less on transportation than their counterparts in outer portions of the county.

So I think it's a good tool to start to think about how do we want to articulate what is the cost burden of living in the city of Grand Rapids, um, and for us to be measuring are we getting better or worse over time.

Thanks.

Okay, thanks for the presentation.

And that brings us, I think, to our uh overview of uh progress on uh CAP in the past year.

Good morning, Commissioners.

Good morning, Mr.

Mayor.

Um, Annabelle Wilkinson, Chief Sustainability Officer.

I'll be providing an update on feasibility and analysis of implementing the commission's 20 prioritized actions from the climate action adaptation plan or what we affectionately call the CAP.

Just background for those of us who were not on this journey in April of 2025, City Commission held a public hearing on the CAP in May because the climate plan is a large overreaching document, um, overarching document that covers over 190 actions.

The committee of the whole prioritize 20 for near-term implementation and providing a little more focus.

In July, the committee of the whole provided staff direction to move forward with the resolution to accept the plan, including those 20 priority actions.

And in August 12th, 2025, the City Commission accepted the Grand Rapids Climate Action Adaptation Plan and establish Commission's 20 priority actions.

After that time, the Office of Sustainability issued a request for proposals for consulting firms to look and assess those greenhouse gas emission reductions, cost estimates, and co-benefits for those actions.

The city received seven proposals at the end of August 2025, and through the city managed authority, a contract was authorized with Fresh Coast Climate Solutions.

Fresh Coast is a Michigan-based LLC.

They have decades of expertise coaching private companies, organizations, and public sector clients to impact sustainability practices.

Some areas of expertise include climate action planning, greenhouse gas emissions inventories, and lifecycle accounting.

Their goals and the scope of their analysis for this work was to look at greenhouse gas emission reduction potential, greenhouse gas reduction percentage from our total emissions in line with our science-based targets, which again are 62.8% reduction by 2030 and 100% by 2050.

Total costs and identifying co-benefits.

Again, of those 20 prioritized actions by commission.

Today we are going to look at just that science, let greenhouse gas emission reduction as well as the percentage from our targets, as well as identifying co-benefits.

The financial analysis is still in process.

We're in the cost verification step with city departments, which we expect to complete over the summer.

However, there are some preliminary budget estimates for fiscal year 26 and opportunities for the future.

Before we dive into those 20 actions, looking at that science as well as those co-benefits, there are a few that are not estimated, those actions from a greenhouse gas reduction perspective.

That's primarily because they are resiliency-based actions, or they're a supplementary action to a larger action.

And I will go into that a little bit more as we dive in.

So starting with energy systems, so our two largest opportunities for community-wide reduction are with partnering with our utilities to help them meet their clean energy commitments.

We see a little less than 20% is a potential reduction from that.

And that also has the co-benefits of improving air quality and reducing energy needed in the community.

For energy systems for energy legislation, this is based on the assumption that we would be advocating for state legislation around community solar, and we would then see community solar applied in Grand Rapids.

We see a little less than a 5% reduction for that measure.

That would also help with co-benefits, promoting local energy independence.

Now increasing access to renewable energy is more of a supplementary action, so that was not estimated from a greenhouse gas emission reduction potential, but it also from a co-bed perspective improves building resilience.

And lastly, resilience hubs.

It's a very small number here, and that's because this is looked at from a pilot perspective, just a few resilience hubs to start out.

So it's a 0.01% reduction.

However, it has the co-benefits of increasing community resilience and preparedness.

For residential homes, for home energy update and financing, this is based on the assumption that we would see with an increase in financing a corresponding increase in energy efficiency measures undertaken in residences.

A conservative measure that was taken, we would see a community-wide reduction of 0.03%.

It would also have the co-benefit of improving air quality in homes.

Now for innovative housing solutions and protecting against displacement, these are more resiliency-based actions, so they were not estimated from a greenhouse gas emission reduction perspective.

However, they do have the added co-benefits of expanding access to diverse energy efficient housing options, reducing scope three emissions, as well as promoting community resilience.

For our buildings and industry chapters for financing resources for business as well as increasing data access, we see a corresponding 0.01% reduction, and that is based on the assumption that increasing financing access as well as increasing options for benchmarking and data access to energy information would help businesses move forward in energy efficiency implementation.

Some additional co-benefits would be advancing equity, improving building resilience, and reducing operating costs for businesses.

For vicinity energy, some of this information was covered in February when we presented to Committee of the Whole.

But as a review, for the ESTEAME program for vicinity energy, the total community-wide reduction that we would expect would be 0.61%, with the city's portion if participating at 0.05%.

The co-benefits of that would be improving air quality and strengthening community partnerships.

For transportation and nature-based solutions, for transportation with pedestrian amenities and expanding bike lanes, we would see a 0.02% reduction and 0.63% reduction respectively.

And that is based on the assumption that we would see a corresponding reduction in vehicle miles traveled with the increase in those amenities.

Some additional co-benefits are improving mobility options, strengthening downtown, as well as improving air quality and public health due to the reduction in those vehicles on the road.

For the Dart EV car share program, again, this is based on the current pilot status.

We would see a community-wide reduction of 0.01%, again, improving mobility options for residents and improving air quality.

For tree plantings, adding more trees, we'd see a reduction of 0.06%.

That additional co-benefit is mitigating that urban heat island effect from a resiliency perspective.

And then for native plantings, the assumption is that we would add acres of native plants.

That being said, this is very small metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.

It does not register from a percentage perspective.

However, it does have the co-benefits of strengthening flood resilience, which we know is very important, as well as improving soil, water, and air quality.

And lastly, for food systems.

For greenhouses and hoop houses, changing the ordinance language for those, as well as reviewing ordinance language for edible trees and livestock, those are not currently estimated as they are primarily resiliency-based measures.

However, they both reduce scope three greenhouse gas emissions and enhance food security.

For compost soil and biochar, we would see a 0.09% reduction, which also improves long-term soil health.

For our compost ordinance and food scrap diversion, specifically drop-off locations.

We it's too small again of metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent to see a percentage for community-wide reduction.

However, both improved soil health and the food scrap diversion also reduces strain on the waste to energy facility and landfill.

So as we mentioned from a fiscal year 26 budget investments for our mobile GR department, the DART EB Car Share Program is continuing the fiscal year 25 three-year contract, that was for a half a million dollars.

An additional 300,000 was set aside in fiscal year 26 for a local match to the U.S.

Department of Transportation CFI grant.

That grant was awarded, but that program has stalled at the federal level.

For tree plantings for our parks department, $12,000 that's set aside for our tree giveaway program, $25,000 for plantings through building bridges, 80,000 for our friends of Grand Rapids Parks partnership.

However, that agreement does cover a number of things in addition to tree planting, such as volunteer coordination, tree stewardship, and invasive species.

And lastly, food scrap diversion, the renew GR program began with engagement events just this March, but also the fiscal committee also saw 195,000 for the purchase of an in-vessel compost unit for residential composting, as well as 30,000 for the purchase of six community compost collection receptacles.

Future budget considerations for the Dart EV car share program for fiscal year 27.

We're going to see through that three-year contract with an additional uh 30,000 in the budget to support the final few months of the car share pilot.

In fiscal year 27, an RFP will be released for long-term program operation, which will not begin until fiscal year 28.

For tree planting, similarly to fiscal year 26 for tree giveaway program and plantings through building bridges.

We do see a small increase for our friends of Grand Rapids Park Partnership with a call out that it we're dedicating 50,000 of the 90,000 specifically to be set aside for urban forestry support.

And lastly, for vicinity energy, again, as initially discussed with the city commission on February 10th, an estimate of 310,000 annually would be for participation in the ESTEAM program.

Funding for this allocation for this action has not been allocated to date.

So we also wanted to provide you some progress updates on some of the actions already.

So our office has secured a catalyst leadership circle graduate student from the University of Michigan for the summer of 2026.

That fill will be reviewing potential pilot options for resilience hubs.

From a home energy update financing, staff has eliminated a city green revolving fund from consideration as the charter dictates the general fund cannot fund individual benefits.

However, staff are continuing to review other financing options.

From an innovative housing solutions action, that will be part of the zoning ordinance update that's happening over the next year.

For financing resources for businesses and increasing data access, our office submitted a WEGA grant application for a staff member focused on providing commercial business coordination specifically to reach businesses where they are.

For pedestrian amenities, we will continue uh improvement additions that support alternative ways to travel.

We also have been working with Michigan State Urban Planning Graduate Practicum Class to provide an assessment of bus shelters for climate resiliency and accessibility.

For native plantings, the Urban Forestry Committee and staff have created recommendations for the code that is currently under review.

For the greenhouses and hoop houses ordinance, that will be part of the zoning ordinance update.

For compost soil and biochar, an innovation team with multiple departments has begun coordination, and that team has submitted grants to finance portions of the equipment, such as a grinder.

For compost ordinance, that is under the Urban Agriculture Committee for review for that language.

For our food scrap diversion, again, I mentioned our renewed Grand Rapids engagement began in March this year, and that's in partnership and collaboration with the Kent County Department of Public Works.

And lastly, for edible trees and livestock, that ordinance language is also under review by the Urban Agriculture Committee, both for the zoning and for the Urban Agriculture Code.

Some next steps.

And we hope to come back in fall to provide an update to City City Commission on the full feasibility and analysis of implementing as well as a progress report of actions.

But in the meantime, our office is tabling at various events like the neighborhood summit and neighborhood associations and presenting.

We're also creating creating resources for residents, such as this residential climate action checklist so that people understand how they can get involved on their own at their own at their own pace.

Happy to take any questions.

Great.

Thanks, colleagues.

Okay.

Um Commissioner Belshak.

Sorry, I'm digesting all this a little bit, but I appreciate the presentation.

Um it looks like there's a lot of things that are currently under review.

Um do you have any sense of the timeline of those things?

Because you know, yeah.

So for the zoning ordinance that's following the um planning department's timeline for the zoning ordinance update.

So I believe that's in the next year and a half when that is looking for completion.

For the um urban forestry committee, that's currently just the language is written, but it's under like review for next steps on on what that needs to move forward.

So I think that's one that's fairly more down the line.

Um, and then the urban agriculture committee is just beginning conversation around what that language looks like.

So it'll probably take a little bit more time.

Do you think that these things would be coming before us in the next six, nine months this year, probably, or like for for the for the code compliance?

I think there's a greater possibility as opposed to the zoning ordinance.

Yeah, but these other ones like the con the urban forestry stuff and that they're looking at those like those could be something we could actually vote on this year.

Yep, possibly.

Well, it's potentially Commissioner.

Let us get back with you on the time frame.

But much of this is was highlighted in the communication I sent to the commission, and I'll follow that up with more estimates on uh when we might complete our review.

Um, my other question is like with the Dart EV program.

Um, this might be a little bit not fair off the top of the head, your head, but do you have any idea where we're at with how many people are using that program?

I might have to phone a friend if you could you can ask mobile GR at some point.

Okay, I just was curious.

We're happy to follow up with mobile G.

I appreciate these numbers.

It looks like some of these things are more impactful than others when you're looking at just the emission reduction, but I think that highlighting that resiliency, especially considering all the flooding we've been having lately.

Yeah, um, that is an important thing to keep in mind.

Absolutely, we can get you that information, Commissioner Belchak.

Any other questions, colleagues?

Otherwise, maybe we'll move to closed session.

We're good.

Thanks for the presentation.

Appreciate it.

Okay, that moves us in a closed session.

There's already been a motion on that.

Thank you.

601.