Laserfiche WebLink
Agenda 3 <br />HRA Meeting <br />Minutes – Tuesday, January 20, 2015 <br />Page 17 <br />1 <br />2 <br />At the request of Ms. Kelsey, a recap was performed of proposed changes having consensus of <br />3 <br />the body: <br />4 <br />5 <br />In General <br />6 <br />Any references to the Board shall consist of “seven” members, and references changed to <br />7 <br />“members.” <br />8 <br />9 <br />Sections 2.3, Section 2.6, Section 2.7, and Section 3.5 <br />10 <br />Leave language as currently written. <br />11 <br />12 <br />Section 3.7 <br />13 <br />Add “elected” before Officer. <br />14 <br />15 <br />Section 4.3 <br />16 <br />Add “City” before Clerk. <br />17 <br />18 <br />Section 4.6 <br />19 <br />Change Rules of Order from Roberts to Rosenberg’s <br />20 <br />21 <br />Section 5.2 <br />22 <br />Remove “or.” <br />23 <br />24 <br />By consensus, legal counsel and staff was directed to make corrections and amendments and <br />25 <br />return the documents for review and approval at the February meeting. <br />26 <br />Recess <br />27 <br />Chair Maschka recessed the meeting at approximately 8:24 p.m. and reconvened at approximately 8:32 p.m. <br />28 <br />29 <br />9.Action Items <br />30 <br />31 <br />b.Review of 2014 Accomplishments and Give Direction for 2015 Work Plan <br />32 <br />33 <br />Motion: Member Majerus moved, seconded by Member Etten to DEFER this item to the <br />34 <br />February meeting. <br />35 <br />36 <br />Ayes: 5 <br />37 <br />Nays: 0 <br />38 <br />Motion carried. <br />39 <br />40 <br />Member Wall returned to the bench at this time. <br />41 <br />42 <br />c.Discuss modifying Roseville Home Improvement Loan Program <br />43 <br />Ms. Kelsey summarized recommendations subsequent to recent discussions and review of the <br />44 <br />Board with representatives of the Housing Resource Center (HRC), and further review and <br />45 <br />recommendations by the HRA’s Finance Committee subgroup (Members Masche, Etten and <br />46 <br />Maschka) specific to modifying the current loan program. Those recommendations were <br />47 <br />detailed in lines 14 – 36 of the staff report. The entire program was further detailed in <br />48 <br />Attachment A to the report. <br />49 <br />50 <br />Discussion included maximum loan terms; current income restrictions and current lack of use <br />51 <br />of the program to achieve desired home improvements for Roseville residents; anticipated <br />52 <br />increased activity and home improvements with these recommended changes to the program; <br />53 <br />and results available within a year to determine if this has increased activities in these areas, <br />54 <br />with monthly reports monitoring progress during that time as well. <br />55 <br /> <br />