I'll let you know like the all the holds and then I'll consider going to go up for December 8th because we're just going to meet and go over all those further.

Because I think there's tech holts today.

So would it be helpful if I joined you for those meetings?

Because the council's asking what's the land bank going to do with them.

Maybe in some cases we'll talk outside of it, although that was the question.

Okay.

We do kind of go over them, like what like what you have and what what kind of spaces can be made from them.

But then also I don't know how full it is to get into this positions.

I don't think that that's the best thing.

Oh yes.

We can we can change them.

Okay.

I thought that might be what they were concerned about.

No, we didn't remember.

Okay.

No, I know.

I was I was worried about that.

Yeah.

Sorry about that for sure.

We'll have enough wool makes really hard to do some houses.

So it's important.

I'm about to go through the mail on this one.

But I'll be rubbing so bad.

Any role from problems.

We just don't have a whole ton of spots where we have that much, but on pitch, it's like almost the whole block.

Messy magnolia.

Yeah.

I know you need some parking spaces, but I think that corner of Mongolia where it goes up in announcement street.

There is that elevated portion of Nelson I can be parking as well.

But we've got to figure out how to deal with that question of the parking because I still think that every home buyer in Syracuse expects a parking space.

And I don't want just like a bunch of garages sticking out like snouts.

So but if it's like an elevated parking space in the rear, the row homes like if they face forward towards Magnolia, and then that elevated space on the back.

Yeah.

They work over that parked right.

We will probably well there.

Stephanie's done those like 10 people.

Stephanie Festwell's got some ideas for um that stretch we have on State Street, cutting an alley in the back to get to the parking that way.

It's gotta be a solution to this.

Yeah.

Okay.

You ready?

Sorry.

Yeah, no, no problem.

Uh probably won't wait.

So she can't tell.

Okay, great.

I'm gonna go ahead and call the meeting to order.

I will note that all board members are present uh with the exception of uh Karen Schroeder, Rob Simpson, Counselor Caldwell, and Councillor Jones Rouser.

I think we expect at least Councilor Jones Rousser to join us shortly.

Uh so with that, I will note that the proof of notice is included on the first page of the packet or right on the back side of the agenda if your packets double sided.

And we'll move to the minutes uh from our November 13th meeting, and I will entertain a motion to accept the minutes.

Oh any discussion.

All in favor, aye.

Opposed, carried.

All right, so we have uh only other business, no uh voting items.

So we'll just work our way through them and I'll turn it over to Michelle.

Um as far as some updated uh block challenge program activity data, we are still continuing to kind of chug along.

So I made a couple changes to how we have this broken out just to better reflect kind of what has been received versus approved versus dispersed now that we're at the point where we have enough of those.

Um as far as uh total applications at this point, we are one shy of 200.

Uh we have technically cleared applications, but we have had four people that have ultimately ended up withdrawing um their applications for uh various reasons.

Um at this point, we are uh pretty close to one million dollars of total anticipated project investment based on estimated amounts that uh people have indicated on their project form so far to date.

Um as far as what we're looking at in terms of that full volume, uh assuming there's not any more uh withdrawals uh from the program.

Uh we are at this point about 30,000 over the total amount that we have budgeted for the program.

Um so again, I think kind of something for us to continue to keep an eye on where we are looking at uh for the rest of the um both applications that have been approved, you know, to proceed as well as where our disbursements are at.

Um, as we've mentioned, it is still the case that uh we have quite a bit of cushion between what has actually been approved, people are ready to go with their quotes versus um what we have budgeted so far.

So I think we have a little bit of time to still kind of consider that.

Um it will be something I think that we will want to consider in the context of our 2026 operating budget, which is something that we'll be um trying to hash out um ideally for our meeting next month.

So in between now and then I think there's a couple things uh we'll get into this a little bit more with some of the other uh program uh discussions, but um there may be some reasons that we want to consider kind of again shifting some stuff around.

Uh I think to some degree that plays in a little bit to the boundaries.

Um, but overall, uh I think things are still moving in a good place at this point.

We've got more than half of the people that have applied have been cleared to proceed.

So the others at this point that uh have not been cleared to proceed, um, those are really um largely situations where they're still waiting on getting their quotes and things like that.

So um uh I would say moving along well so far based on what we want to see.

Um, I do expect that as far as kind of for the projects that we have dispersed so far, it does seem like some of the uh return on those is pretty inflated.

Um, and I think part of that has to do with the fact that of the projects that have been completed, there's been about 26 that we've uh have cut disbursements checks to or are ready um to do so on where we've signed off on them or have them um otherwise ready to go, and several ones that were pretty large uh dollar amounts.

So we had a couple roofs that were in there that really kind of skewed what some of those numbers look like.

Obviously, if you're only topping out a 2500 per property, that'll do it.

So um would expect that to shift, but I don't think that that's necessarily problematic.

Of those properties that are approved to proceed, how many you think are going to be done?

Um I suspect that we are not gonna get more than 50 this calendar year, and I think that's probably generous.

I think there was a lot of folks that are really planning on finishing work in the spring or uh in the summer, but we have been encouraging people to get their applications in just for the purposes of being able to plan out um uh what spend looks like.

Uh I know uh we've had a few people that I've heard of even just this week where they're kind of um holding out to be able to get quotes for everybody on their team, and we've really been encouraged encouraging people to take advantage of the option to kind of check the box of still securing quotes so that we can get things in there from a planning perspective.

And part of the reason I guess is the quotes that they get now, I think it would be good in the spring.

So yeah, that's a great point.

Um, I think we have been uh working to kind of follow up with everyone.

I think uh initially we had been uh trying to um get to a place where we had at least two out of three members on a team all ready to go before starting to clear people, um, particularly within the last month or so.

We've kind of gone back through and said, like anyone who's ready to go at this point, just get them uh approved so that we're not running into those types of issues.

I do think it's possible, obviously we can adjust uh those uh dollar amounts, but the way that we are estimating here, I don't think it changes, it could change the total amount of homeowner investment that has to go one way or the other.

Um, but we're counting it um kind of uh estimating on the high side when in doubt, if that makes sense.

So if we have them in the pipeline, then we know that that's no more than 2500 per person is going out the door, uh and then we can kind of plan it that way.

So Michelle, um forgive me if I missed it, but so as this is all kind of coming together, are we keeping open?

Are we still um receiving applications?

The applications we are still receiving applications.

I expect that we will still continue to get more of those.

Um we were at a meeting in uh Salt Springs last week.

Um it was a neighbor interest meeting, and some of those were folks uh I would say it was probably 50-50 split of the room of people that uh were coming because they were interested in the program but hadn't applied.

There were some people that were working to get their applications together.

I'd say there's at least two or three teams that I'm aware of that are in that uh position.

Uh, and then there was a handful of people there that had fully completed the program and were kind of there to just speak to the experience.

So we will still continue to get them.

I think the biggest thing as far as kind of keeping an eye on anticipated spend.

Um, I guess unless the board feels strongly otherwise.

I think so long as what we have approved to proceed is within the amount that is budgeted.

I think we can you know be comfortable with that, understanding that we're we need to have a 2026 budget kind of flushed out um for within the next month, anyways.

So okay.

When you're approving them to proceed, are you approving a whole team at a time or sometimes at this point?

We have been approving individuals.

So there's basically kind of a cover form that we have on there where it'll list here's everyone that we have on your team to date, here of those members, these are the people that are um good to go, and then each individual gets kind of a specific notice.

Um, we have made uh quite a bit of effort to really duplicate the communication around this notice to proceed is specific to you as an individual.

Uh these are the members of the team that are ready to go just because we don't want there to be any confusion with particularly in the instance where somebody would need to be pulling a permit or something uh for a property.

So if it's something where we need to be able to verify on the back end to process the reimbursement that the pullment the permit was pulled, we just want to make sure there's no confusion there and that everyone's clear.

So any other questions on program activity.

All right.

Um the next uh item that we had on here was uh um fore and after photos.

I know that that was a request uh that we had from our um uh a couple of our most recent meetings, so have a few uh selected uh uh ones here to show you.

Um these are all properties that include kind of the name of the oops, sorry.

Um includes the name of the property, um, the team name, uh all of these are uh team names that were self-selected by the teams themselves.

But um this is a property over on uh brand nav that uh got a new uh paint job uh looking a lot better than it had been previously.

Uh this is a property uh over on the South Avery.

This is one where they did a lot of landscaping, removed quite a bit of uh you can see over there on the left uh invasive species and things like that.

Um replace it all with kind of hardscaping and some additional um arbitro ID.

Brian Welsh frame walls and it looked a little together.

Yeah.

That other house they could have used to fend.

Yes, I uh noticed that when the yeah, so I made a note of that actually when I put this in here.

Um now that the uh wouldn't have noticed that until the after, yeah.

So um, but I think this is an interesting example just because this house is in pretty good condition in terms of exterior condition scores, you're not really seeing a lot of evidence of chipping paint or things like that.

So um the difference on the landscaping makes a really big difference, and obviously this section of South Avery is a really traffic corridor, so um, it's a good one to see there as well.

Um driveway project.

Uh we had a uh team of uh three women over on Bryant Ave that were working together.

Like their name.

These are all so uh these women are all uh on the younger side.

Um and then we had another group of older women.

Just curious on the on the previous one.

Um the uh is that considered was that just resealing?

This was resealing based on the conversation that we had with the permits office.

So uh, but they were all set with the scope on this one.

So um this was a team of uh older ladies that uh live over in the Salt Springs neighborhood.

Um so two of them, uh two neighbors pretty close together, one on nine and uh one of seven doll parkway that did some uh grass reseeding, um, which again kind of same situation there.

The houses are in pretty good condition, so there really wasn't a ton of uh obvious exterior work that needs to be done, but this is something like a little bit of grass seed makes a lot of difference sometimes.

So walkway over in uh Tip Hill.

Um the 100 and 200 block of South Lowell has had quite a bit of participation of uh some of the the neighbor, several um uh landlords that own several properties, kind of all along a row pairing up with uh neighbors that are nearby.

So we've been able to get quite a bit of density of projects in that area.

Oh, okay.

Is this portion the city's right of way side?

Probably.

Yeah, that curve looks pretty low, and then if they come through and do the curve over that to the park.

Yeah, yeah.

Um, based on where the before and after was the conversation with the uh permits department was that um they were considering kind of the scope of work and in-kind replacement.

So while that could happen, it was something that was based on kind of a pre-existing walkway, um, the papers that were out there.

So um certainly could be a risk that the homeowner could incur themselves, but in terms of uh eligibility for the project, uh, we felt like it wasn't creating something that was detrimental at this point.

So um another one just a landscaping project.

This one's a little bit more kind of appears to be in the back air.

This is a property that's on the corner.

Um, so that's kind of where their eligibility came in.

But again, just the trimming and removal uh helps kind of clean it up a little bit.

Um there uh front stair entry entry.

Um someone's over in Salt Springs, uh kind of near the Le Moine uh area.

Yeah.

Uh so roof project.

This person actually was our first person to fully uh get all of their uh work completed and dispersed, and they're working on putting in another application to correct their driveway that you can see over there kind of on the left that still uh needs some work.

So work or is that yeah.

So uh the correction I think uh again.

We are uh we don't give the way that we've kind of characterized uh driveways.

Um we will allow you to go through the program if you were replacing it in such a way that makes it compliant.

Yeah, um, so we we don't want to preclude you from making corrections.

Obviously, if it's something that is extremely problematic, then um you know we can't let you recreate uh new problems, but um I think based on their scope of work, it's in line with that spirit.

And they got in the sidewalk already.

Um so kind of all of those things paired together, uh creates kind of a good update.

Um, this is another roof project.

Uh this is uh another team of uh older folks that lives over in Salt Springs area.

Um then uh kind of sidewalkway landscaping.

So yeah, we'll keep uh keep those as uh for the jobs that are just paint.

I know obviously that doesn't require any permits, but are you guys their EPA certification?

Yeah, for their contractors, yeah.

I noticed on I think it might have been Tennyson.

Is it no?

Might have been uh Brian, there's uh a sign with our see your neighborhoods logo on there.

Yeah, what is that about?

Uh so we everyone who goes through this program and gets the the point that they're getting their disbursement, we have yard signs okay that we made for everyone.

So on the idea is that like it becomes a marketing uh opportunity.

Sounds like one percent, and we'll pull it alone.

Um we did one run of them uh and as kind of a baseline, and then it occurred to us at the point that we did the first printing that it would be fun if we had somewhere on there where we could get team name on there, or even kind of left like a white blank space so that you could fill out your own team name.

Um, so we will consider that for a future uh reprint because I think we only got 200 of them printed.

So at this point, you might need some pseudo.

We still have the airports.

Um we took that out of a neighborhood and business developments marketing uh department operating.

I mean, do we have someone in department who's making the signs?

Uh Sarah Calla.

Um she's our uh Sarah Paula, she's our um public information officer for uh neighborhood and business development.

We have talked a little bit in the past about kind of branding and marketing on a website.

Um fantastic.

Could we be starting socials specifically for this?

Yeah, and so that's a uh I think kind of the idea of the uh SYR neighborhoods uh page.

So SYR neighborhoods is something that we had kind of I think was initially put together when we had launched the resurgent neighborhoods initiative.

Um, largely was not getting a ton of attention or use in a way that I think would uh uh kind of prior to this point have created uh such a brand identity that could not be adjusted.

So I think kind of based on conversation with uh Sarah and the rest of the comms team, um we kind of came to the determination that we would use that as the primary platform moving forward.

So um now that we have some of these, I think the goal would be to start planning out what content for that looks like.

Um I think there's a lot of cool opportunities for even just like resident spotlights, um, like other people that have gone through the program.

There's a lot of fun get no, they're having some fun with it with their team meetings.

Yeah, and some of them are just like really fun groups of people.

So some of those groups that we've had or even the team meetings, um, trying to kind of create opportunities.

Obviously, we don't want to we want to keep the process moving and not slow things up for purposes of getting photos and stuff like that, but um, to the extent that we can make it into existing processes, it's something that we want to try to do.

Anybody jump in on YouTube videos and that kind of uh not yet, but it is certainly something that we'd like to try to do.

So can you tell me which property, like which where's the far west side?

Yeah, we can uh we can get to that.

North and west and season um north or west dentist.

Yeah, I think that's kind of under our next section.

So um if there's any other questions on programs.

Okay.

Much lower homeownership rate.

Yeah, so we can get to that a little bit.

So um, I know at our last meeting we had uh kind of begun to take a look at some of the preliminary recommendations that CZB had put together for um pacing of areas.

I think coming out of that meeting, the request was that we kind of take a look at uh getting done on paper what would be a list of uh regardless of what area you're in, what are things that are happening kind of on day one from program availability, whether it be from housing strategy resources or um other resources or assistance that we can be providing and that we will be providing everywhere.

Um, and then how does that kind of shape out?

I do not have that list today because I think um we just needed a little bit more time uh to try to crunch some of the different numbers.

I know we had some discussion around places where it might make sense to uh make some adjustments kind of just off the bat uh and what we had seen, but I did want to follow up and kind of share these with you all to have them just for uh a frame of reference.

Um they include the information about um the property condition scores.

So these are the exterior condition scores that were based on property kind of windshield surveys.

Um so the 2025 ones were all done by our planning team over the course of uh this summer, so uh August, September.

These are all pretty new.

Umstrausser to your question, the far west side would be uh if you're looking at the tip hill map, it would be the northerns uh section.

Um so basically kind of Genesee Street up would be considered the far west side.

Yep.

And then the street south is the tip hill kind of delineation.

Um I think also included in these.

So uh first one is condition scores.

Uh if you flip the page over to the second page, you will see uh a breakout of vacant structures, uh, any known tax delinquent properties uh and any properties with uh significant code violations.

So basically the more colors you see going on on that sheet, the more of an indication it is that there's problems uh in one way or the other.

Um there's a map that includes the land use.

And I think the big kind of takeaway with that is that the darker yellows are rental properties, and then the light um almost kind of white looking uh color are owner-occupied properties.

Um so you see kind of uh looking towards the southern end of Tip Hill.

Um there's a high concentration of rental properties in that area.

Um can kind of track where all of the different red is more um commercial properties.

Um so you can kind of see that along uh Genesee Street.

But uh, and then the last page includes all of the, and I apologize there's a mislabel on the um on this map, but uh this is all of the any kind of uh resident participation so far to date.

So this includes basically anyone who has called our office, emailed our office, attended a meeting about the housing strategy at any point in the last year, uh, answered a survey that we had sent out door to door, uh, and then purple would be uh folks that have submitted applications.

So I think kind of the upshot with that, what we've seen is that um in the tiphill area, there's been quite a bit of participation in places where we didn't necessarily think we were going to get as much or where we thought it might need to move.

Um, or I guess in the original CZB map, it was recommended that it uh was going to likely need more time.

Um so even just in the um tiphill section of the neighborhood, uh it's looking like there may be some places where we could likely look to move faster just based on participation there.

Uh I think the same thing kind of goes in uh salt springs.

I think we've seen quite a bit, I would say the conflict area uh in Salt Springs.

We definitely got a lot of participation up in the uh Hazelwood, uh all throughout kind of the middle section of the neighborhood, Fayette Boulevard, Harwood, um those are all uh looking good.

Um have recently had a big application that came in for Fenway, which was encouraging to see.

Um that is uh a group of folks that are all um there's definitely a lot of seniors there.

Uh so I think that's one of the streets that I was wondering when we discussed about the area that um may not have sent in anything.

Yeah, uh, and I think that that's one where I think it's a good example of uh it just takes more quite a bit more staff time and from a capacity standpoint, like it's a lot of additional outreach and kind of helping people through the process, technical assistance that's one of the streets that I asked specifically though, like there's been generational and we were concerned that maybe some people may not have had the uh correct deed or anything.

And I think that all of those things could still end up kind of being true for certain properties, kind of on a case by case basis.

I think what we uh also kind of can see in the Salt Springs area, um, definitely kind of towards the for the uh westernmost section of the neighborhood, kind of Ellis Crowley most sections of Bruce Street, very little um comparative kind of participation.

So again, doesn't mean that there isn't a significant amount of need there, but um kind of looking at the full scope of uh what participation has been, what current uh occupancy looks like, code violations, all that um that part all kind of I think makes sense.

So um I think we uh my goal between now and the next two weeks is to kind of wrap up some of the additional number crunching uh related to some of this.

Um I do think I know that we had discussed at one point um a couple months back within the budget that we had initially passed for the 2025 year, um, it originally had contemplated there being three programs, uh one of them being a homeowner renovation program, uh, one of them being the block challenge program, and then one of them being kind of the larger um, or I guess it was more uh focused on exterior repairs.

So kind of a middle of the road between a block challenge, um, but not totally a full interior exterior.

Um, I think that uh when we're considering the question around the um how can we most effectively kind of pace geographies.

Uh I do think that that is one area where there may be some wisdom in us reconsidering what it might look like and how uh whether we would have the um funding capacity at this point to consider uh more middle of the road exterior renovations program, um, kind of as a component of some of those uh in some of the property, some of the sections of the neighborhoods where we know we need a little bit more codes, but there also are PAC as a neighbors where you can see that there's some participation.

Um so that's something that we want to look at, but uh I just need to crunch some numbers and um since the last time we met less than eight business days ago, I've not quite uh gotten it all the way there.

So and um I know I mentioned this before, but um we did just in the very beginning, like communal spaces, yes, certain areas.

Um so I guess more or less like how we identify anything like that, or what does that look like?

Yeah, yeah.

Um you know, somewhere so I think that there's a couple two layers of that.

So the first one would be um within the context of infrastructure improvements, uh, neighborhood and business development did include within our um CIP uh that was uh the plan that was approved.

Uh there's funding uh specific for housing strategy related work uh in that plan.

And the idea was that we would use those dollars for uh specific kind of infrastructure projects, parks, other capital improvements uh that would be above and beyond what those budgets would look like um for kind of across the city.

Uh again, we want to ensure that the resources that we're putting to this are additive.

We're not taking away from work that would be getting done otherwise throughout the rest of the city.

Uh, but where can we really kind of do some additional full full court press uh if you will of resources?

Um so we've identified uh kind of draft preliminary list of projects that we would like to try to pursue for 2025 that I expect that we would be bringing to council for the authorization to proceed with the uh approvals of the funding for those projects.

Um so those are in uh kind of throughout both Tip Hill and Salt Springs.

I think in Salt Springs, um uh there's definitely uh would be inclusive of some parks uh related improvements, uh same kind of deal.

I think there was a couple things with uh James Pass Arboretum.

I know there was a decent amount of work that was done there recently, but there was other um components of that work that I think that the parks department uh had been hoping that they could try to get to.

So trying to um target those resources to do that type of work.

Uh obviously want to try to pair it with uh additional work to do things like sidewalks and then the corresponding if there's lead service line replacements, obviously, that need to be done.

We don't want to replace a sidewalk without making sure we're taking care of that stuff.

Um so trying to kind of distribute that uh in a way that is uh equitable and makes sense kind of across uh the two neighborhoods.

Um so hoping to get you all a full, I'm just waiting for uh an updated kind of um dollar amount and project list from uh uh couple of the operations departments, um, but I expect that uh towards either end of the year, early uh the uh 2026 calendar year that we would be bringing that to you all.

Um, and so that's kind of the first component.

I do think that um in terms of kind of at least uh on the for both east side and uh even West side TNT to some degree I don't know that either of those neighborhood associations are necessarily I think the way that they're just enveloped in the broader TNT in the special projects of TNT um they can uh not necessarily always availing themselves of all those resources and obviously there's limited dollars kind of in those fun pools um themselves but I think that would be kind of the next uh uh second area that we would look at if that's something that the board is interested in trying to do but um not necessarily something that's a requirement if people feel like resources are better spent I think um just just hearing that portion I think that um not every neighborhood has a an association and then not every resident attends their local TNT we already have a good uh amount of money from the city and I think that people should um participate in those meetings and you know instead of us finding other ways to put money somewhere else um that's just the right often more people into TNT yeah I mean I don't think we should get more money um that's just offhand I don't think we should um I'm just saying like the TNTs are established and they get you know money I mean if you want to give a few extra to incentivize people to come into the TNT then yeah but um I just don't think everyone has an associate uh neighborhood association so yeah I think in the neighborhoods that we are working in um at this point it is the case that they do um obviously the Tip Hill neighborhood association has been going on it's uh um longer running than um the salt springs one but I think from everything that we've seen from the Salt Springs uh folks uh I think actually in response to the housing strategy being in the neighborhood uh they kind of uh have been self-organizing and to going through the process of establishing a dedicated neighborhood association um but I totally get what you're what you're saying there and oh I think that's a one was fine and help them get something started.

Is this separate from that?

Uh so uh Jack Brower is the property uh manager for Le Moine uh he participates with uh the he's on the um board of directors that's been the neighborhood but uh it's very much not a Le Moine driven process I would say it's very uh very much has come from the neighbors themselves and I think Le Moine wants to be supportive where they can they understand that they're a part of the neighborhood and that their students are part of the neighborhood but um I would I would say I would you know lean more towards that what Caitlin said as far as like if there was money shifted in that direction that it'd be to incentivize people participating in I would say the TNTs because they're more they're in every sector versus uh an association that not everyone has a sector.

Um I'm sorry to choose mostly folks from each of those right I mean for there's no real organization coverage.

Right.

You're well the far west side neighborhoods that there's a far west I consider to be in part of Lakewoods.

I mean downtown on Lakewood Murphy maybe get like three quite three to five people so like front that's okay.

No they would be inclusive in the West side of TNT there's just it's it's a difficult thing.

Yeah yeah those folks do fund the tip neighborhood association yeah I I would say um I'm open minded here but but clearly both the Tiphill neighborhood association and this burgeoning Salt Springs neighborhood association really seem to be embracing this program.

So um I would I would like to find ways to encourage that.

But I don't I don't think we we should probably think I think more work it's done more work itself there we will there's some we could use it yeah we should be proceeded or champion owned by people I hope no yes neighborhood so Michelle just a separate but related question is I'm looking at the maps obviously we have delinqu or we have vacant properties in both neighborhoods um many of which are not tax delinquent.

Obviously, we have delinqu or we have vacant properties in both neighborhoods, um, many of which are not tax delinquent.

Um, I'm wondering, assuming we don't dig down to this level for every vacant property.

I'm wondering, given the fact that these are priority neighborhoods, whether or not there's an opportunity to dig in a little deeper onto the vacant properties in these areas to determine what's going on there, whether they're zombie properties, yes, and passed away.

Yep, yes, and yes, um, the team has already started doing that.

Uh so I think based on kind of uh overall condition scores, um, there are actually several properties.

I know, at least within uh Salt Springs, I was looking at the map where they've actually at this point uh have been taken care of or are on their way to being taken care of.

So a couple of key land bank properties that uh are transferring over.

So but yeah, we are looking closely at that.

And then the land bank note, you know, just again wondering.

Um, I know there's a lot of contributing factors for how we prioritize foreclosures, but you know, thinking about whether or not there's an opportunity here to prioritize the tax collectment properties in these neighborhoods for foreclosures.

Yes, and consider.

Yeah.

Um, and I think, yeah, absolutely.

And I uh Caitlin and I just had a conversation about a couple properties last week where we were looking at um, I think there's also opportunities there where depending on the circumstances with the given property, there may be other non-housing strategy dollars that we can use to kind of take care of the issue.

So um uh just so that we can kind of ensure that we're working in the spirit of the whole block whole area working as efficiently as we can.

You know, down the road, I think we're gonna be a legislative fixes first, making priorities are that's uh absolutely, yeah.

Um point it out to Calendar 56 elsewhere.

It's something that within a neighborhood and business development, we're taking a very close look at, and I expect that that's gonna be kind of a top 2026 priority for us is kind of looking at the um that ordinance.

So have council look at that abandonment law that I know that they've been looking at.

But I know Detroit they try to do a legislative fix because we have the state legislative.

We told you to think earlier about uh you know vacant property yeah, yeah, and not to get too far off track here, but I think that that would be kind of the idea is that the it is very important, and it's certainly in terms of I think the way that the existing uh vacant property registry is working, it almost creates a situation where you get an easy way out by complying with the registry and it then ends up kind of uh our hands end up getting tied for a little bit longer than is preferable in terms of actually correcting the violation.

So um that is something that we're all uh looking at kind of in tandem with this and is definitely will be a big piece of uh success longer.

So excuse me, in terms of getting the word out more and more.

Have we done anything or are we gonna do anything reaching out to like faith-based organizations and to get them to give the you know the word and get the word out to their congregations as well as other kinds of community groups that might not be a community group, but might have influence in a neighborhood.

Yeah, yeah, that's what I was thinking for that movie street and all of that little area, like uh a lot of those people go to that families, you know.

So they have that uh I was I was gonna contact them on that.

Yeah.

I mean, is there also I'm just thinking you know, looking at Salt Springs neighborhood well, it's a little west of think of it.

Tennessee street cleaners.

I mean, everybody goes.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, we do we do have flyers and we can certainly uh make sure that we circulate those also open to do in presentations wherever any groups um that people would try to do St.

Lucy's to get that far west side as well.

Yep, you can definitely do that.

Most of the rules, well, most of those parishioners go come from reach site.

It's for sure.

What else do we have for it?

Yeah.

Uh I just wanted to uh run through a couple of rental property items real quick if we got a minute.

Um that's right.

Just let me know.

Right.

Good enough.

I may have to step out a little early depending on how long this goes if we do.

Madam Vice Chair, could you adjourn the meeting for us?

Thank you.

Um the only other thing I just wanted to uh try to check in on here briefly before we wrap up.

Um in your packet, uh, we have included some uh the draft preliminary term for a rental rehabilitation program.

Um I think that there's a lot less to new information to go through here uh based on the fact that it is heavily is very similar, I think, to the um homeowner renovation draft terms that we have put in place so far.

I think the main uh kind of highlights here are once again, we have taken basically uh as a starter place kind of copy paste from the program terms that uh Invest DSM was using uh for their uh rental property uh program.

Uh again, just as a baseline, kind of something to react to.

I think the couple things that I wanted to just get a sense of if people had strong opinions one way or the other before we begin to kind of start socializing these with uh any rental property owners to kind of get their feel for it.

Um the structure for how the Invest ESM program was set up for rental properties, they had a cost share of 30% covered by the organization, 70% of the work covered by the rental property owner.

Um so obviously a little bit of a different breakout than what we have been doing uh for uh any of the block challenge work so far to date.

Uh the way that they were kind of structuring their affordability, uh, there were some specific provisions in there that limit uh your the property owner's ability to increase rent uh in excess of two percent a year, uh and then they have kind of a period that is tied to uh the AMI of your tenants.

So I believe it's 80% uh AMI with corresponding durations that you need to maintain a tenant who meets those qualifications.

So um uh basically kind of is a copy paste of what we have in place for the homeowner renovation program.

If you're doing 15,000 up to 15,000, you have a three-year requirement, uh 45,000 is a five year, and then 75,000 is a seven year.

Um, but just kind of wanted to get a sense from people as to whether or not those made sense as a baseline, or if we know kind of off the bat that we feel like it needs to be uh different in any direction if anyone has any strong failing feelings one way or the other.

Oh, they have show they're working with teams, right?

It would not be a team, it would not be a team thing, it would be uh uh individual base, but uh it would be tied to ensuring that the um we would essentially in the same way that we do for any of our other flood programs now.

We do annual income monitoring of the tenants.

Um so we would basically you would go through the program um at the point that the work's completed, then you would need to be able to uh demonstrate that you have not raised your rent and that you are you have an income qualified tenant in the property uh for whatever the duration is based on how much you uh how much work you did.

So it should only be for rentals that have income qualification, that market.

I think the I think the the way that this is kind of contemplated here is that in order to if you are a rental property owner that wants to avail yourself of this program, you would need to commit to maintaining your rents at uh an affordable threshold and maintaining kind of an income qualification for your tenant.

So um, I think those are obviously different things, right?

So not raising your rent above a certain amount so as to not displace the tenants that you currently had is one thing.

That is uh there's also I think a value to considering ensuring that at a certain point the income has to be below a certain threshold.

Um, but I think it's just kind of a question of uh obviously we do need to do the additional outreach to rental property owners to kind of think socialize with them and get a sense of, you know, uh we want to ensure that people are doing the work.

We want to ensure that the work is done in a way that is not contributing to displacement.

Um, but also we don't want to put it in terms that are so strict that no one is going to take advantage of it.

So um I'm I'm more worried about the homeowners.

No there's a finite amount amount of one homeowner saying outcomes for everything.

But what you're talking about is get the one.

Uh but what you're talking about is couching those terms of 80% EMI working, you know, work for stuffing stuff like that.

That's great.

I mean, that's exactly what actually we learned some temporary percent, 100% AMI.

So yeah, that's the way to do it.

That gets us over the hope.

So that that um is that this section where it says appeal to one of the target markets identifying the uh revisation plan.

Well, they do like the goal to individualist 80 to 100% AMI.

I mean that that's a uh a hop uh depends there's a a certain amount of subsidy that you can get depending on what your income threshold is I think the maximum allowed is it goes up to 120 um but you get less subsidy if you're doing uh a higher tenant less subsidy than we don't know on what I can buy correct sort of like sense I okay that's I had more questions for that but I yeah I think my my goal for kind of putting this out here now obviously we need to do a lot of kind of getting some feedback from landlords on what is going to uh is what seems reasonable but what is not gonna end up being kind of a deterrent I think we uh in a lot of these neighborhoods there's a lot of rental properties that are intermixed with uh homeowner properties and so if we are going to meet our goals of ensuring we're kind of moving the block we have to have a program that can meet both terms uh I think but um just wanted to get a sense of if there was anything that like if this seems too like it's too much or if it seems like it's way too little off the bat and we know that there's a a definite kind of higher threshold that we want to put in place that would just be helpful to know for shopping it around.

You handles landlords and meetings.

Yeah we have um so I think what we need to do is kind of sit down with some focus like focus groups of you know five people at once of just like okay so here's what we're thinking about doing what do you think about this and that I think to date we have not had anything that's been kind of on paper for them to react to um that and frankly I think the conversation comes down to this one which is here's the duration at which you would be looking at not raising your rent over a certain amount ensuring that your tenants are within this income band that kind of thing so kind of stupid question.

So it's a multi-year affordability period if their tenant is income qualified in year one but then starts making more money is it fine that that same tenant is in there or do they have to I think we could make it fine um obviously I think we want to encourage people leveling up in life and economic opportunity like that that shouldn't necessarily be a um a barrier there obviously we would want to see that from one year to the other there is either a it's that same tenant that has stayed there and we would just need a mechanism I guess I'm sure we're getting enough paperwork um from the tenants to be able to clearly delineate whether or not it's a you know if the tenant is choosing to leave that's one thing and a new tenant comes in whatever um but ensuring that it's uh they're not uh creating a situation where they're effectively evicting their tenants is a way to get around it yeah we don't want to place yeah yeah I don't want to be a dual sayer but the more regulations or specifics we put in on some of this the easier it is for some of the more sophisticated landlords to gain I've just seen it happen my entire career and so I'd be somewhat cautious on that I also it should be geared more appropriately towards code violations well we wouldn't consider right we would consider it but would we want to approach landlords specifically around code violations I don't know I think the way that this is I don't want the idea rewarding people in code no unless yeah I have a problem with that too but I think the way that this is broken out in here right now uh just because you have a code violation is not necessarily a barrier to applying for the program right like we have plenty of owner occupied houses that could have a code violation they maybe don't have one cited but there is the the presence of something that could be a violation um so I think we want to ensure I would maybe characterize it as we don't want to uh allow anyone who has a pattern of being a bad actor so uh if you have an extensive pattern of keeping code violations open for a very long time we've had to sue you you get BAA tickets that you're not paying this that the other those would all be disqualifiers if we are that tight on it can't have any code violations at all I think there's plenty of landlords that uh find themselves in situations where though it is the cost of doing business um properties have deferred maintenance they need to do the work if they are going to additionally be ensuring affordability for a certain period I don't know that that's such a bad thing um but certainly it's something again kind of a a question for what what the board feels is yeah I mean that first house we saw with feeling paint that's a code by I think definitely but I mean there are land ones that I agree to get certain houses because it's doing a good job yeah a lot of times are limited by the amount of wine man something like 30% will

If they are going to additionally be ensuring affordability for a certain period, I don't know that that's such a bad thing.

Um, but certainly it's something again, kind of a question for what what the board feels is we saw with feeling paint.

That's opposed by it.

But I mean, there are landlords that I agree to get certain houses because you do a good job.

Yeah, a lot of times are limited by the amount of wine band, something like 30% will push them over the edge of the ones that they would have to house.

It'd be better for the whole neighborhood and for the tenants in it too.

I mean, it's amazing.

There's a bunch, there's a few of those landlords who own 10 or 12 properties up on temporary hill.

And they're they're good landlords.

Yeah, and I mean, I think uh we've seen from uh we sent out mailers about the Black Town program to every single uh assessed property address.

So inclusive of rental property owners, we've had several landlords that have reached out to us to say, hey, I don't live here, so I don't necessarily know the neighbors nearby, but I'm interested in the program.

If you can like I'd love to, you know, join a video call to meet the nearby neighbors.

So the people that I think are trying to do the right thing are likely to pay attention to something like this, the people that are not trying to do the right thing, we can suss that out pretty easily just based on your past history of performance, but okay.

I'm just gonna say this.

When I look at a pill to one of the target markets decline in the revitalization plan and um trying to identify, I guess individuals with 80 to 100%.

I think that we are that we are uh somewhat feeding into the um uh poverty being in other places more prevalent.

Um I don't know why we wouldn't do 60 percent.

That's still a regular work in person.

Um then you have uh make modifications to improve an existing rental property floor plan functionality, which is fine.

But then the next one says convert multi-unit rental properties into fewer units or single family properties.

So when I see that, it's more or less are you trying to get rid of the individuals who may pay less, like landlord who has I don't know if it were targeting illegal conversions here, or are they legal conversions?

If it's so convert it back.

Yeah, I think again, uh that's one where um it's language that was kind of copied directly from a pre-existing template.

I don't know that we have any commitment to it one way or the other.

I do think to your point of if it's a illegal conversion, ensuring that it can be there legally in some way, shape, or form.

So obviously we don't want to have a situation where we're allowing you to maintain a unit that doesn't have proper egress and you're running it out.

So how do we get you to this like some of the languages sounds to me like we're gonna be pushing certain individuals out and they're else affordable?

Yes.

Okay.

And it does feel weird in the middle of a housing crisis to say that we want less units.

Yeah.

But yeah, maybe change that to say um if it was an illegally converted multi-unit property to convert it back into something that's permitted by zoning.

Yeah, I guess would you be comfortable with something that was a little bit more kind of tied to your we get a baseline of what your tenants are currently paying, whether you're paying 60, whether you're at 60% AMI or 80%.

What their tenant is paying.

Um, if they qualify for for the rehab, um we help with the rehab.

We I don't know if we need to be in the weeds of it like that.

I guess the fear is we give somebody a grant and then the next year the double account.

Is that part of it?

Yeah.

Or it creates a displacement for that tenant who's already there.

So if the it becomes unaffordable for them and then they have to move as a result.

I also think you have to think about unintended consequences you have a commitment of a landlord, an owner in a multi-unit, and then that landlord goes to sell.

What happens with the continuation of the program?

Does a new buyer have to accept that?

I think it would be it would be the same situation as an owner-occupant who sells it to somebody, they would prorate whatever their remaining amount is.

Um, so they could either pay their way out of it or sell it to somebody who wants to go along with those terms.

Okay, yeah, yeah.

70% of the project.

multi-unit and then that landload goes to sell what happens with the continuation of the program does a new buyer have to accept that I think it would be it would be the same situation as an owner occupant who sells it to somebody they would prorate whatever their remaining amount is um so they could either pay their way out of it or sell it to somebody who wants to go along with those terms okay 70% of the project yeah yeah so if they're making a significant investment like that I guess they're I'm are you going both sides of the side they're entitled to uh raise the rent yeah does it when you say not more than two percent increase annually do you mean from the time that work is done going forward or from what the rent was at before the project from what the work was at before the project um was again kind of how Invest ESM had had their setup does not mean that that is what we have to do but I mean two percent is a a reasonable number obviously we don't want to create a situation where it becomes untenable to just do the business of being a landlord but again kind of to the um if preventing displacement is a yeah something that we want to ensure is prioritized we do have to have some something I think within these provisions but it's gotta be thought through a little more I mean I can just imagine a scenario where they're putting 8000 into the house they anticipate that they will increase the rent more than two percent okay but I agree with your general idea that we don't want to displace people so I don't know how we balance those two yeah that's exactly where I'm going well we can uh we'll start doing some kind of conversations with landlords and getting a sense of what uh any feedback that we have yeah from them of kind of what's what are people currently charging what would become unreasonable uh and then kind of follow up but I think that's really the biggest thing that has to be kind of fleshed out for the sake of this rental program.

So we'll use something for people to study on the average like if for instance up in separate we have the we have the um all of those numbers kind of from like a um the census level uh it gets a little different I think obviously on a site by site basis and the landlords I think that we have that are here locally I think we need to confirm that the people that are here and engaged that you'll find out that a letter is there starts significantly lower so with the rent that came up with well we just want they find somebody pays them every month and takes care of the apartment right well and I I mean I think again a question of uh if something is going to be affordable or not is also based on what the income of that individual tenant is right so if you're making 120 140 of AMI you can handle uh a rent increase and not necessarily be cost burdened but if you're just kind of hanging on at 60 or 80 percent it's not going to take much to put you in a situation where your costs are um not uh where we want them to be so okay so I think that's yeah unless anyone else have anything it's just such a yeah messy yeah like I know we don't want people to pay for 50 percent of their income from housing but you might want to pay 40 percent if you could live in a much nicer place.

See there's a you know see and I mean what is at the end we want to create more places for for people to live quality yeah I mean clean up you know I mean actually that's exactly what your your point is I mean the more the better and sometimes people are going to pay more than 30% like I don't have answers for you I'm sorry.

Yeah yeah so some doodle the next one to know and with that note motion to adjourn motion second second on in favor all right all right um the calendars it I know uh so that's why I had said it might email like