All right, we'll begin this meeting of the Housing Authority for the Sacramento City

Council.

Please call the roll.

Thank you, Council Member Kaplan, Council Member Dickinson, Vice Mayor Tallah Montez,

Council Member Pluckybaum, Council Member Maple, Mayor Pro Temgada, Council Member Jennings,

Council Member Vang, and Mayor McCarty.

Here.

You have a quorum.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Pluckybaum.

We lead us in the land acknowledgement.

Please rise if you're able.

To the original people of this land, the Nisanan, the southern Maidu, Valley Plains, Miwok,

Patun, Wintu, people, and the people of the Wilton Rancherillas, Sacramento's only federally

recognized tribe.

May we acknowledge and honor the native people who came before us and still walk beside

us today on these ancestral lands by choosing to gather together today in the active practice

of acknowledgement and appreciation for Sacramento's indigenous people's history, contribution,

and lives.

Thank you.

Salute.

I put a religion to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which

it stands, one nation and the God and because of all, with liberty and justice for all.

Okay.

So, Mary, we move to the consent calendar and I have no speakers for the consent calendar.

It's just item number one.

No comments.

We have motion to second the consent calendar.

All is in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any noses or abstentions?

Hearing none, consent calendar passes.

So, we move to item number two is a public hearing, City Council housing authority, tax

equity, and fiscal responsibility act hearing and approval of issuance of tax exempt bond

obligations for secure.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Whitney Hinton with Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency.

Staff is requesting recommendation to conduct a tax equity and fiscal responsibility

act hearing for the issuance of taxes and bonds by California Public Finance Authority

or CalPFA for the Sakura Project.

Sakura is a new construction affordable housing development proposed on 0.8 acres of land

located at 2016.

There will be 134 studios and one bedrooms ranging between 30% and 60% of area median income.

There will be a five-story building with approximately 2,000 square feet of ground floor

commercial space.

Amenities on site will include a dog run.

Can you stop real quick?

Yes.

Sorry, a little time out.

I'm going to ask our vice mayor to come in and preside.

I just realized I'm within 500 feet of this property.

So, I mean, is that the other one for accusing yourself?

Thank you.

Thank you.

We apologize for making you stop.

Let me know if I need to start over.

I'll start over.

Yes, they start over.

Good afternoon.

Whitney Hinton with Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency.

Staff is requesting to conduct a tax equity and fiscal responsibility act or tougher hearing

for the issuance of taxes and bonds by California Public Finance Authority or CalPFA for the

Sakura Project.

Sakura is a new construction affordable housing development proposed on 0.8 acres of land

located at 2016 Street.

There will be 134 studios in one-bedrooms ranging between 30% and 60% of area median income.

It will be a five-story building with approximately 2,000 square feet of ground floor commercial

space.

Amenities on site include a dog run, storage for up to 70 bikes, laundry rooms on all five

floors, multipurpose community room, and a ground floor courtyard.

The project will be jointly developed with Capital Area Community Development Corporation

and a neutral housing, California.

Mutual housing would be the property management company and the resident service provider.

In closing, staffers requesting the public hearing for the Tefra and the issuance of taxes

and bonds by CalPFA for the Sakura Project and staff is available to answer any questions

you may have.

Thank you so much.

We will take public comment first.

City Clerk, is there any public comment?

Vice Mayor have no speakers on this item.

Thank you so much.

Looking for questions.

Okay.

Council Member Dickinson.

Thank you Madam Vice Chair.

Vice Mayor.

I have to adjust my language for my history of what I've upset in the past.

I do have a couple of questions.

I'm curious why it's CalPFA that's financing this rather than us doing it locally.

The developer came to us with the request to go with CAPEFA.

I'll have Christine.

Sure.

Yes, Council Member.

We usually are the bond issuer.

In fact, almost all the time we want to be the bond issuer.

It's just to ensure that over time we're the monitoring entity for the affordable housing

to ensure it's being operated and run well and maintained in good condition.

In this one case, the developer had already had a relationship with CalPFA on this property

and implied for bonds prior to sort of working with us in a way on this project.

So we did make an exception for this because they were so far along in the process.

You are right.

We typically recommend that we are the bond issuer.

Well, Christine, once you have anticipated my next questions which are given this arrangement,

what are the assurances we have about the quality and character of the construction firstly

and then secondly, how do we ensure oversight of operations and maintenance since we're

not the bond issuer?

Right.

Well, staff did do our typical due diligence before we came to you.

So we had our construction staff review all of the numbers to make sure the quality and

our requirements were being made, met everything from the type of flooring being used to the countertops

that last at a very minimum 15 years.

But most of our minimum construction requirements last longer than that to make sure they're

in good condition.

We did analyze everything from their property management plan and leases to their resident

service plan.

So we can only do so much upfront.

So upfront, it looks very good.

It looks like their budget is sufficient to pay for the operations.

We do have a good relationship and on lots of mutual project in our portfolio, they are

good property managers.

But you are correct, we have no way to legally enforce any, we won't be monitoring, we won't

be going out annually like we typically do, we won't be checking files to make sure residents

are income qualified or paying correct grants.

We won't have any legal ability to do any of those things.

So you've also made some judgment about the adequacy of the maintenance reserves for

the project.

Well, I'm assuming.

We did look at it, so at least for the first 15 to 20 years, it seems sufficient, yes.

And can you tell us a little bit more about this particular bond issuer, some of details

on their operations, who they have financed in the past, what kind of track record they

have.

I mean, if we don't have any direct oversight ability, then give us a reason that we should

be confident that these folks as the bond issuer will exercise due diligence in their oversight.

Well, let me tell you a little bit about them.

They are a fairly new bond issuer.

They're, they're origin, originate from Kings County.

This would be the second project that they've requested issue bonds in Sacramento, the City

of Sacramento, the first being in Council District 1 last year.

They are fairly new to this, so they don't have a very long track record, so I can't tell

you how that will go.

And light of that, is there any opportunity to contractually enter into an agreement with

them to either allow us to maintain oversight or to agree to certain performance criteria

with respect to their own oversight?

Is that, I'm, you know, that had not occurred to me before, but it makes me wonder whether

that's something that we might be available.

Is CalPFA, do they have a resident here today?

We can reach out to them.

I think this project was pretty far along.

We can talk to them about that.

I will say this, just, you didn't ask this, but I'll provide this.

One of the reasons we've had developers, a couple of developers ask you to use other issuers,

is that fees were a little bit lower than ours.

We have such a sense adjusted our fees to match theirs.

So other than that, you know, I don't know why, you know, you'd want to go with another

devout issue, but we can investigate that some more before closing for sure.

I don't want to hold this up.

This is a good project and it should move forward.

I just want to do what we can for the future when none of us are sitting here and other people

are asking questions if it's not well maintained and well kept.

What were those people doing back then?

Why weren't they paying attention?

So if that's possible to explore, I think it could be beneficial.

And it might be helpful for the future in cases where we see someone from outside the area

as a bond issuer for one of these Tefra hearings.

Anyway, thank you.

Thank you so much.

Mayor Prattima-Karen.

Thank you very much.

I think it's briefly on that.

We had very lively discussions in the past about this particular challenge of looking at

other entities like CalPFA.

But one of the things that I would worry about is where we have dual oversight and dual

fees that are being collected.

One of the reasons why we pushed hard on trying to actually look at a different provider

was to look at the best rates and they're possible.

But I don't think there's anything wrong with us looking at what kind of oversight to make

sure that in the long run.

But I don't want to go backwards on the fee structure because that was elevating the

cost of delivering affordable housing projects.

And the affordable housing projects are already extremely high.

I think we need to manage the fee structure on those.

Nothing wrong, I think, with looking at what's the best oversight role.

I would hate to say we're going to pay for CalPFA and then also SHRE on fee structures.

But with that I'm ready to move this forward as well.

So Mayor Prattima-Karen are you opening and closing the public hearing?

I will open and close the public hearing.

And if it's okay, I'll move the item since it's not in my district.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you so much.

So I have a motion and a second.

Anyone else?

All right.

You council member Kaplan.

Council member Dickinson.

Council member Pluckybaum.

Council member Maple.

Mayor Prattima-Gueta.

Council member Jennings.

Council member Vang.

Mayor McCarty is recused by some of the members.

Yes.

Thank you.

Item passes.

Thank you so much.

Thank you for the presentation.

Moving along to the discussion calendar, item three.

Authorization to execute.

Deliver First Amendment to master pledge and assignment agreement for Broadway.

Yes.

We think what Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency staff is requesting authorization

to execute and deliver amendments to bond documents related to the Broadway senior

center apartments.

In 2008, the housing authority issued mortgage revenue bonds.

The bond documents must be refinanced in March of 2025.

In order to permit additional time to refinance the project, the borrower has requested the

housing authority as the bond issue were to enter into the amendment to the master pledge

and assignment with US bank to extend the date by six months.

Broadway senior apartments is located at 5200 Broadway.

There are 120 units comprised of ones in two bedrooms ranging between 50% and 60% of

area median income.

Dawson Holdings Inc. is the owner and apartheid is the property management company.

In closing, staff is requesting approval to execute and deliver the amended bond documents

for the refinancing of Broadway senior apartments and staff is available to answer any questions.

Thank you.

No public comment, Councillor Mabel.

All right.

Thank you, Mayor.

I move to open and close public hearing and move the item.

Please.

This is a really important project in my district.

Really important to have senior housing.

I know it's difficult times.

And so I really appreciate the housing authority for working with this project to make sure

that they can do the refinancing time.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Dickinson.

I just had one question.

If you've got 15 units for development disabled and families, do you need more than 180A parking

space?

This for the next item.

I think that's the next item.

We will answer that question.

We will answer that question.

Before you.

Okay, we will let the answer.

I'm just moving too fast.

All right.

I'll give you a chance to think about it.

Second.

Yes, I'll second.

Okay.

Thank you.

I do remember last time this came with the council when we selected this entity to do the rehab

when I was in that seat.

So it's a very nice senior housing project there in the top park area.

So full support, continue it, affordability for the next generation.

So with that, we have a motion in the second.

All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

He knows your abstentions.

Hearing none.

Item passes.

Next item.

We move to item four.

City Council approval of additional funding for River City apartments.

Well, staff is seeking approval to provide an additional $2.1 million to River City apartments.

In April of last year, City Council approved the bond issuance and long commitment of $2 million.

The developer applied to mortgage revenue bonds last year but was unsuccessful due to the decrease availability of state tax credits.

To fill the gap, the developer hopes to secure additional federal tax credits and the approval of our additional funds.

As a reminder, River City apartments a new construction project on approximately one acre.

They can lie at the corner of 69th Street in Fulsome Boulevard.

There will be a five-story building with 66 units consisting of ones, two, and three bedrooms.

Serving residents with income raging between 30% and 70% of area median income.

The property amenities includes community room, a barbecue area, a school-aged play structure, and a half-court basketball court.

This project is unique as it will be the permanent home to 15 individuals with developmental disabilities.

Chelsea Investment Corporation is a developer and CON&M management is their approved property management company.

Resident services will be provided by Pacific Southwest Community Development Corporation.

They will offer 15 hours of on-site resident services not limited to 10 hours of after-school programming.

Also, California Regional Center will provide a minimum of 15 hours of supportive care per week to the 15 individuals with developmental disabilities.

In addition, Department of Development Services approved a $1.5 million loan to also California Regional Center for the support of this project.

In closing, staffers requesting approval to approve the additional $2.1 million of housing trust fund and mixing income housing funds to the River City apartments project.

And staff is available to answer any questions you may have.

Okay. Thank you. Mr. Dickinson?

Okay. I'm glad you guys are catching up.

So I have the same question on this one that I had on this last item.

Would you like me to try that Whitney? Okay. That's not a very good question. I started thinking of that.

I think you have a very good point there, Councillor Dickinson.

We usually just go the developer and their parking standards are just what the city requires.

So we don't usually analyze that part that much.

But now that you've brought it to our attention, I think we should go back to the developer and the city staff and suggest that more ADA parking be put in place.

I think that was a great suggestion. Thank you.

Thanks, Christine.

I don't know if I can ask for more than that.

Okay. Thank you.

That's it. That'll do for now.

I'll spend my time.

Dickinson, actually, we were in preparation for this meeting.

One of the questions I had asked, and this is for my colleagues that are on RT, is the, and one, first of all, this is a great project.

The Council moved forward last time.

It's unfortunate we weren't successful in the funding rounds.

I think this is very helpful.

One of the concerns that I have, and for my colleagues that sit on RT, the RT property that's on Q Street, the good thing about this is that it's right next to Lightwell, which is also why it's also competitive.

But the challenge with that area there is that there are improvements, ADA improvements, to get to the Lightwell station.

There's like a 300-foot area where there's no sidewalk or walking area.

You have to go through the asphalt.

The asphalt is seen better days there.

So for my colleagues on RT, that's more of an RT property.

Now, the city, you know, back then, I think it was Council Member McCarty, gets money to do the, and the 65th Street Rack.

Not somebody to do the improvements there on the sidewalk side, as well.

So those, that area has been improved, but I think where I would ask my colleagues on RT is to address that piece there.

With this, I'm going to move this item, because I think this is the, we need to get this project done.

But again, I want to move this item in direction to staff to follow up with Sac State on their housing.

This project, you know, not only has 30% to 70% AMI for families, you know, college town apartments, which was a lot of families and low-income standards that go to Sac State.

There is a huge need for working families who could meet that income requirement.

So, and Sac State is willing to do the, in conversations with them, to do the recruitment.

The fact that this is so close to that area into the campus makes it ideal for us to be recruiting.

Now, we can't restrict the students, but we can definitely look at advertising and recruiting on the campus before, so that we have the maximum potential use for this area here.

And they do serve a lot of families with disabilities on the campus, so this would be, again, another ideal place for students who want to go to Sac State that have disability challenges,

and that they can do to benefit from close and affordable housing.

So, with that, I'll move the item with this direction.

All righty, we have a motion and a second.

Aument. All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any nos or abstentions?

Hearing none, measure passes.

We now move to item number five, which is 2026, one-year action plan, federal program's allocations process workshop number one.

Good afternoon, Christine Weichert with SHRA.

Today is the first workshop for the City of Sacramento 2026 annual action plan.

The workshop provides information on several federal programs, an opportunity to solicit project ideas.

I'll start with providing a brief overview of the program requirements, the estimated 2026 amounts, examples of past projects, and the schedule moving forward.

SHRA administers, community development block grant or CDBG funds, home emergency solutions grant or ESG, and housing opportunities for persons with AIDS or Hoppa on behalf of the city.

Head requires grant recipients to complete a consolidated plan, which is a five-year plan that identifies community needs and strategies to meet those needs.

In addition to the Consolidate plan, head also requires that we prepare an annual action plan, which identifies specific activities and projects that will be undertaken.

These next few slides focus on the CDBG funds. This slide shows the objectives that were developed in the last consolidated plan.

Overall, funding is to help create opportunities for low and moderate income residents through three different avenues, affordable housing, public facilities, infrastructure, and public services.

In addition to meeting the CDBG objectives, we must also ensure that projects meet a national hub head objective, which includes an activity that benefits an area, which means a location that is primary residential, and at least 51% of the residents must be low and moderate income.

Direct assistance to low and moderate income households or individuals who are at or below 80% of area-meaned income and low and moderate income housing.

Eligible CDBG activities include public facilities in the infrastructure, like community centers, playgrounds, streetlights, public services such as meals on wheels or shelter operations, acquisition of land for eligible activities, clearance and remediation activities, and planning administration.

There are also ineligible activities, which include general government buildings and expenses, operation and maintenance, purchasing of equipment, new housing construction, political and religious activities, and regional parks and facilities.

I also should note here that other things we look at include things like how quickly the project can be completed.

We must spend the CDBG funds in a timely manner, so it is important that we select projects that are ready to go in the next 12 or 18 months.

We typically see the current years appropriated budget allocations in April of each year.

For planning purposes, we based the Estimating Titlement on the previous year, so in this case 2024.

As you know, Congress has not yet approved a 2025 budget, but a continuing resolution is being discussed.

For 2022, we are estimating that we will receive about 4.5 million for CDBG, and we just went over the activity that CDBG can be used for.

For home, we expect about 2.2 million and home funds typically go to construction of new multi-family affordable housing projects.

For ESG, we estimate about $400,000.

These funds help people who are homeless, for example, through rental assistance and operation of emergency shelters.

And for Hoppa, we are estimating $2 million, and Hoppa is used to provide services and housing development for people with HIV or AIDS.

So overall, an estimated $9.1 million.

For CDBG, the annual entitlement is divided amongst several categories.

This table shows how the funds may be utilized.

For estimating purposes, we allocate the maximum allowable for both public services administration, and then work backwards from there to determine how much funds are available to other categories.

We allowed for an allocation of up to 15% to public services, so that would be about $675,000.

Usually these funds, again, are for homeless shelter operations and meals on wheels.

A maximum of 20% to planning administration, this is used to pay for staff, planning, and fair housing activities.

About $1 million goes to infrastructure and public facility improvements.

In addition, there's a loan repayment for infrastructure at Mirosal Village, and that repayment is currently estimated at $980,000.

Approximately $845 million for affordable housing, and these funds go to multifamily rehabilitation and home repairs for low and moderate income homeowners.

The last category is a capital reserve, which is a contingency.

The next few slides list the infrastructure projects funded over the past five years per council district.

This slide shows park and infrastructure projects in districts 1, 2, and 3.

The next slide shows districts 4 and 5.

Again, you can see a lot of parks and complete street kind of projects have been funded.

And this last slide shows districts 6, 7, and 8.

So the final slide outlines the process to identify projects for the 2026 action plan.

SHRA has initiated the process of meeting with city staff to discuss project ideas.

We are currently holding our first action plan workshops, and in June we'll have a draft list of projects that will be presenting to our commission and city council.

August through October will be finalizing the action plan, and we'll be at council again in October for the approval before we send it to HUD on November 15th.

And this concludes my presentation.

Once again, we welcome any input you have for action plan projects either now or anytime before the next workshop which is currently planned for June 10th.

And staff's available to answer any questions you may have.

There I have no public comment on this item.

Okay. No public comment, Mayor Pro Temgare.

Thank you very much, Mayor. Appreciate this time.

You know, one, do you want to thank the SHRA for their support in past projects.

In district 6, particularly those on traffic safety and crosswalks and areas where we've had individuals close to the Georgetown Center run over.

And then also the efforts on ensuring that we can get some money for bathrooms and some of our parks that, you know, where we have a lot of young kids who need to be able to have them close by.

So I'm glad that that's moving forward. I know we had to switch some around because of the income requirements.

And I think it's important that we get information out to those communities who were expecting that eligibility to be able to be notified.

And then also get those projects moving forward.

Now, as we go through planning a couple areas where I think I'd like to see some more exploration.

And that is on the home repair side, on the emergency home repair side.

You know, we could enforcement has a home repair program where, you know, they're, they people are getting fine for issues that they have.

And many of the folks that are getting fine are folks elderly in a fixed income, veterans, habitat for humanities gone out there and done some repair programs.

But I'd like to see if there's a way that CDBG funds can be part of that on the emergency repair.

And I know that there may be some conflict because we have to put the money forward on the type of project.

But I'd like to have some exploration if there's a way for us, if there's any federal funding in the future to be able to fund that code enforcement with the income eligibility for folks who can't fix their home but are continuing to get fined.

So on the second one, we are doing some of this funding.

You know, for redroads an example of the complete streets and safety improvements.

But I wonder if there are in our effort to respond to the active transportation commissions request for tactical urbanism where, you know, a little bit of money can go a long way.

And if we can't work with public works on identifying, you know, some projects that we can get a lot for a little on safety repair.

And I'm thinking about just on, you know, District 6 on, you know, 21st Avenue and 58th, making sure that we did do even the the bullbouts or the way so that the vehicles aren't turning quickly without stopping and avoiding that rolling right turn.

And so, when we've seen kids that are getting hit on bikes because people aren't stopping, but those tactical urbanism pieces could probably potentially be helpful.

So there's already a process moving forward that our staff have. So I'd like to see if we can look through public works if there's an eligibility there.

So, what I'd like to have a conversation about is how is our access and different programs, whether they be home or CDBG, working in concert with our commercial corridor revitalization strategies.

We know those corridors are expensive to pull together and some of it is happening through the federal funds that we have.

But can we overlay? Because 4 million is not a lot of money, you know, I mean, it would CDBG. But overlaying some of those with the other work that we're doing.

For example, maybe the tactical urbanism or safety improvements from the Mercy Housing Project that San Juan Motel crossing Stockton Boulevard to the shopping center will not only improve commerce, but it'll improve the safety of people crossing that area because they have to essentially walk 600 feet or more to get to that intersection.

But that helps the commercial corridor revitalization and meets some of those mutual goals. So it's not a lot of money. So how can we overlay that in the areas where we actually have a tougher challenge?

So those are my three points there. Couldn't force enforcement with home repair second. What are the low cost vision zero or technical urbanism projects that we can achieve through this and the third piece is how are we overlaying all of this with the cities?

Commercial corridor strategy that we've already approved and moved forward.

And also up there. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Kaplan.

Thank you, Mayor. Again, as always, thank you. And hopefully we get to at least get this year of funding so we can plan things.

As we're planning things, I just want to get it out there. This funding could be pulled back. Correct?

So it could be yes.

So I just want to all good plans could go aside if for whatever reason the funding goes away.

Yes, for 2025, I'm hoping by the time we're in front of you and June we'll have a better idea at least what happened in 2025.

I'm not sure when we'll know about the 26 budget for them.

Thank you. You know, one of the things which I'm proud now that District One has an area that qualifies.

And so, I think that's where the city of Roebla is near and dear.

One of the things if you if you drive around Roebla what you'll see because this was brought into the city later is there are incomplete streets and sidewalks that are not completed.

And some of these are where our kids travel to get to and from school.

And one of the areas which borders Councilmember Dickinson and I is Norwood.

And I think that's where we have it is one of the more dangerous roadway intersections where we have funding within the city and a plan to start upgrading it to make it safer.

But I think when you look at it there are areas of Norwood that do not have sidewalk.

And I would like to see if we can use because we have great plans in the city.

And we just don't have funding to implement them.

And I'd like to take a look at what we've already done as a city.

How can we add on to some of the areas where we already have funding to make it a complete street.

So it is safe for our seniors and our kids to get to school.

Especially if we even just concentrate on one side of the street that is completely safe for them to to travel.

So I would really like to see I am already working with city staff on this.

And if we could there's a couple areas that don't have sidewalks that I think that this would help complete it and would love to see if that is can be part of the CDB plan for coming that we see come back to us.

Absolutely. Thank you. It's a pretty surprise.

Thank you Councillor Dickinson.

Thanks Mayor. I certainly would second the sentiments expressed by Councilmember Kaplan with respect to Norwood and Robla in general.

But it also reminds me of the question of we have so much more we could invest CDBG and then we've got dollars.

This is as long as I can remember and that's a year or two.

That has been a struggle for us to figure out what's the best strategy with respect to use of our CDBG dollars.

So I'm curious Christine what is the current thinking to try to focus the money as much as possible for impact given that you may have a limited geographic application of the money under that approach or is it a good idea?

And is that approach or is it more to spread it out to try to help here and there across the city?

I think our number one well besides I already stated that we're looking for projects that can be completed quickly so most likely the design is either underway or can be done quickly but also leveraging other dollars.

So for example if the city has already started to work on a project and CDBG can come in and just fill that last bit of the gap that the city is looking forward to completed I think that's really important to us.

I think in recent years we've ended up with sort of a not spread out completely but not just concentrate on one or two projects we've been selecting about four or five projects annually.

So it's sort of between the two.

I appreciate the answer and after seeing this and thinking about it for a long time I tend to think that concentrating makes more sense than trying to get more places and sense covered because you don't have the impact when you spread it when you spread it out but it makes it tough.

I'm sure you could absolutely share that.

The other thing I wanted to touch on has to do with the ESG and the Hoppa funding and you mentioned in the staff report in the description that among the eligible uses of that money is homelessness prevention.

I really do think and I've expressed this to the director and SHRA staff that we need to do much more with respect to focusing on prevention.

Again we have limited dollars clearly and so we have to be judicious about how we use and we have traditional uses of ESG and Hoppa money for sure for a long tail.

Maybe it's something that we need to think about a little bit. Can we can we use some more of that money in prevention efforts and mayor this is part of something that's I think larger and I understand we're going to have a workshop I think in April on what we're doing with homelessness.

Hopefully that will be comprehensive will look not just at what the city's doing but what the county's doing what's not going to step forward is doing what the agency is doing so we can see the entirety of the landscape with respect to this and figure out how we how we most effectively apply the totality of resources that we have available to us.

Again no secret I'm going to be asking how do we get more into into prevention across those those sources. So in this context I just suggest or ask maybe that you think about what's what's our capacity and our capability here.

I think that's a good idea to understand that there are tradeoffs so maybe the tradeoffs are ones we don't want to make but maybe but also that's something that I'd like to see as considered.

I would say thank you that's very helpful. The ESG we do work very closely with the county and the city on the ESG funds and right now they're basically it's not quite even but almost half of it goes to the shelter the operations of the shelters in the other half is going to rapid rehousing so that's an attempt to go back to the city.

We can get people who have just become homeless back in housing quickly so that they can resolve their issues so it's not quite prevention but it's close to it.

Yeah I think we get it we got to help people stay house before they end up in the street.

We just have to do a better job of that and that's not just the agency that's incumbent on all of us I think.

Thanks Mayor.

Thank you.

I appreciate the presentation as always I learned a little bit more each and every year about how this process works and you always been incredibly helpful in your team and helping us navigate this.

I think you know from a very broad perspective I think Councillor Burt Dickinson also mentioned this in his own way but really a focus on equity.

We talked about that a lot at this council led by Councillor Mavira and Councillor Rick Jennings and others about how it's not just about spreading our resources as a city.

Evenly everywhere and hoping for the best it's really about how do we maximize our resources in the areas that need it the most to the residents who are struggling the most.

So I just hope that we also take that lens in this work to and I know that we do spread it across the districts as I think that's a fair thing.

But it is a challenge of course because you know representing all the communities that I do you see real real disparities in terms of the basic resources that people have whether it be in their parks in the neighborhoods I know that that councilman Kaplan mentioned about sidewalks and so those are those are areas where I think you know if we can make improvements there we can get more being for a buck and definitely.

Make an impact in terms of equity. I really appreciate the focus on maybe doing less projects but but making sure they're impactful rather than spreading small amounts of money around that may not be able to do as much I think that that's a good strategy also like the doing what can be done quickly what can

be done. I think that's a good strategy. I have a couple specific things for district five and one thing in particular councilman Kaplan mentioned this as well about complete street completely agree with you on tactical urbanism in ways that we can really quickly and efficiently make our street safer.

I know our staff has already put together a brilliant freeport boulevard plan that it has I believe no funding to actually do a lot of the improvements and they're working on the design elements so love love to have that be somewhere that is considered as a part of your work is if there's any areas that can be bolstered by this money.

The other and this is more you know long range but for those who may not know we have the city used to own and operate a gun range within the city limits and mangan park and then back many you know not many but several years ago for I was on this day and this this body

is a very important thing to do is to make sure that there's a medium and clean up of that gun range facility so it is there it is a vacant building it does not provide any value currently to any of the residents in that area and it's a very it's an area that's really in need of some kind of community resource the community there is very

there being some kind of community center I've used for community now 10 times but I'm really driving it out something that they can use and rather than having a vacant building that you know causes blight so I would love for that to be at least considered as an area at the very outside I know that it will take more money than what is offered up in CDBG but I'm hoping that we can be strategic at some point in the future and figure out what that looks like because I'm a little worried about it sitting there for another you know few decades without ease and so those are the areas that I'd like to see for now.

I really appreciate this opportunity. Thank you.

Okay thank you.

There's no further comments or questions.

There is no vote on this item right?

Review and provide direction which we did so I guess the only thing I say is you know watch C-SPAN every day and see what's going on and it's frightening and it's not going to be a good deal.

And all we can do is keep our heads down and focus on what's in front of us today so we know we have these programs we've been implementing them for several years and SHRA since 1982 so we assume in less we told otherwise and you know even if there are some actions there's no legal challenges and other things in the interim too so stay the course.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So are there any council comments ideas questions.

Seeing none is there an SHA SHRA executive director report.

I just had one comment it's really to follow up exactly on what you were talking about mayor is that we are very closely looking at the discussions going on with the federal budget as you know they are working on a continuing resolution.

Which if it's approved and it's a clean CR we would be funded at the levels from 2024 which is really still very hard you know because no none of our costs stay the same.

However if the CR does include directions that gives more authority for the executive level of the branch to make changes they could have a huge impact on our programs going forward so.

We will continue to keep you updated and we will know more by Friday because that is a deadline.

Thank you.

I have three speakers for public comment matters on the agenda so first is Brooke Miller Jacobs then Paul Jacobs and Christina Rogers.

Good afternoon and thank you for your time.

On the evening of January 7th a bullet from a drive by shooting in the 60 block a CV circle Marina Vissa traveled over 650 feet into the mill where I live and struck my daughter's bedroom window while she was getting ready to go to bed.

The housing authority of the city of Sacramento has their admissions and continued occupancy policy document it states federally assisted housing is intended to provide a place for residents to live and raise families not a place to commit crime to use or sell drugs or threaten intimidate harm or tear rise neighbors.

This is not happening at Alder Grove it's not happening at Marina Vissa it's spilling over into the other neighborhoods crime is getting worse it's not going away.

Sacramento Police Department conducted a CPTED report from Marina Vissa has SHRA Commission or city council seen this report.

SHRA has turned things around for Marisol Village formerly dos rios from a highly violent community to a community with very little violent crime we demand the same be done for Marina Vissa and Alder Grove and demand the following strong management on site to enforce the rules enforce the rules complete fencing around the entire property monitored limited access by gates in the property more cameras in public areas.

Real time access to camera footage by sack PD Sacramento City Council and SHRA Commission needs to spend some quality real time at Marina Vissa on Alder Grove to just see how bad things are.

Remember it's your responsibility to endorse and implement a policy design to help create and maintain a safe crime and drug free community what do I tell my daughter.

Thank you for your comments Paul Jacobs.

Good afternoon mayor McCarty city council members and director does our my name is Paul Jacobs and I'm also here to speak about crime violence occurring at two at HRA properties not on the agenda today Alder Grove and Marina Vissa you just heard from my wife.

Who has been trying to speak up and raise awareness about the January 7 shooting as well as other problematic levels of crime violence in these communities.

However, after my wife spoke to the county board of supervisors on January 28 requesting for them to put pressure on the SHRA Commission to do something supervisor Surnas response noted that his staff are available to help direct my wife to contact her city council member.

I'm also concerned with this issue additionally at a February 19th SHRA Commission meeting in response to several people's testimony including my wife's commissioner on four recommended that the community members reach out to their city council members again and their county supervisor.

It appears to me that people who have a responsibility in this joint effort are not taking responsibility for this for these issues and are giving us the run around.

I'm here today to encourage the city council members to contact your appointed SHRA commissioner and remind them explain to them their important oversight role they have over SHRA's responsibility to create safe and crime free communities on their properties.

The commission also seems interested in creating some type of community safety committee to address these concerns to be clear nobody's requesting this of them are asking them to do this community members are not experts in crime reduction and safety measures.

However, the city fortunately has those experts on hand the Sacramento PD what we're asking for is that it's a SHRA and the commission work closely with Sacramento PD to resolve these issues that we're seeing at these properties.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments. Kristina Rogers is our final speaker this afternoon.

Good afternoon city council I'm requesting that you support SHRA with their deadly crime issues at the older Grove Marine of this site.

It appears they do not follow their own public safety and resident rules last year this lacks attention to site safety resulted in the use of illegal firearms and deaths on the property.

The year 2020-24 had at least six shooting investigations on the older Grove Marine of this property which included the death of a seven year old girl and a man has already been shot and killed there this year.

As much as people claim to be concerned about gun violence and people of color it's shocking to me so many victims are being produced at the SHRA site.

The year 2020-24 has been a very important part of the year.

The year 2020-24 has been a very important part of the year.

The year 2020-24 has been a very important part of the year.

The year 2020-24 has been a very important part of the year.

They needed to go and on the police scanners people have heard the SHRA residents waving criminals into their buildings.

When I have a child, when a child is died that should light a fire under every, every accountable adult.

please help us HRA get their priorities straight. Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comments. Mary have no more speakers. We do have a closed session following

this meeting. Mary read that to the record. Yes. Thank you. So we have the 3 p.m. special

meeting for the purpose of a closed session. We've got two items on that agenda. Item

1 is pursuant to government code section 54957.6 for a matter pertaining to negotiations

with recognized bargaining units. Sacramento Housing and redevelopment agency, S-H-R-A,

employees association. The purpose is to confirm that S-H-R-A is chief negotiator.

Lishaldozer and James Shields. Item 2 is pursuant to government code section 54957B for

a matter pertaining to personnel. Performance evaluation of the director of the Office of Public

Safety Accountability. I have the full council here in Chambers and I have no public comments

for either of these items. So Mary may I adjourn to closed session? Yes, we will. Thank

you. During the closed session.