Laserfiche WebLink
<br />inability to pursue that plan and someone suggested that an HRA would be a way to <br />address that concern. <br /> <br />At least from my perspective this idea seems to have corne from out of the blue. <br />Understanding the genesis of this idea would help me understand what we are trying <br />to accomplish. <br /> <br />Alternatives Considered and Rejected <br /> <br />In my experience you can never know that you have arrived at the best plan without <br />considering, and rej ecting, a number of other plans. We all agree that housing issues <br />are crucially important to Roseville. Contrary to Mr. Mahon's assertions, there is no <br />doubt that a city can still be concerned about and address housing issues without <br />having an HRA. I would like to know the specific alternatives that were considered <br />by staff and the reasons they were rejected. Below are some of the reasons staff has <br />offered as to why we need an HRA or what an HRA will accomplish. <br /> <br />. Provide a dedicated and continuous funding source (Summary - 6.0, a) Did <br />staff consider doing this as a line item in the budget? If so, why was it <br />rej ected? <br /> <br />The argument that is being advanced is that we need and HRA and an HRA <br />levy to "provide a dedicated and continuous source of funding for safe and <br />decent housing within the city." I find this argument (for an HRA levy) to be <br />unpersuasive and inconsistent. The assumption underlying not doing this as <br />a line item seems to be that the HRA itself will be more committed to <br />funding. However, when the argument about another layer of government <br />comes up, the response is that "well the council retains all taxing authority." <br />True enough. Then what advantage does the HRA give us? None that I can <br />see. If the council is dedicated to housing issues it will provide funding to <br />address this issue whether there is an HRA or not. If they are not dedicated <br />to this issue, they will not approve the expenditure whether there is an HRA <br />or not. What am I missing here? <br /> <br />. Provide flexibility in managing housing programs in partnerships with local, <br />county, state and federal funds. <br /> <br />What does this mean? To me this is the sort of language that sounds nice, <br />but doesn't really to me anything. How are we not "flexible" currently? I <br />would like specific examples where our lack of flexibility has prevented us <br />from addressing housing issues. If the council is considering pursuing a <br />policy option to address a perceived problem, we should first be certain that <br />the problem exists. <br /> <br />Once we are convinced that the problem exists, we then need to consider if <br /> <br />-2- <br />