2011-02-15_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HRA Meeting Minutes – Tuesday, November 16, 2010 Page 3 Discussion among Members, staff and Mr. Schumacher included disclosure of assessments at the time of sale; term for assessments determined by the financing option chosen by the HRA Board, with bond financing subject to a fifteen (15) year term; current association fees including heat and utilities, based on the building’s former construction as an apartment building prior to conversion to condominiums; calculations as to whether an approximate $20,000 assessment in addition to a mortgage payment was detrimental to marketing them and positioning the units out of the market; part of the HIA law and a requirement of the process was for the LJA to develop a financial plan for review and approval by the HRA and ensuring that future association dues increase sufficiently to avoid this situation happening again, and to provide for sufficient reserves for future improvements and maintenance. Further discussion included this and similar self-managed associations being unaware of the legal requirements retaining reserve funds; legislative sunset on HIA’s projected in 2013; and consideration of whether the RHRA would qualify and/or be awarded CBDG grant funds to facilitate a loan to LJA. Member Pust expressed concern with the randomness of using public money on one project and attempting to determine which project was the most needy based on their awareness of the HIA option, perhaps overlooking other needs that are just as needy or significant. Member Pust questioned staff on the one-time, limited application for CBDG funds, making the City ineligible for other potentially worthy projects. Ms. Kelsey confirmed that the City could only apply once in 2011 for CBDG funds; however, she noted that a preliminary survey suggested that 51% of the homeowners at LJA met income guideline eligibility; and the HRA could consider this request from the perspective of addressing affordable housing goals, and assisting citizens on limited, fixed incomes. Member Pust concurred; however, opined that those income guidelines may be applicable for approximately 40% of the entire Roseville community. Chair Maschka opined that this request was representative of another need for the HRA to explore bonding options, and should be included in the HRA’s future discussions regarding a 2011 work plan. Chair Maschka concurred with Member Pust regarding using public monies randomly, but noted this and similar situations that the HRA needed to determining their role and funding options for that role. Executive Director Trudgeon noted that the HRA’s web page included HIA’s as a funding tool, but that staff did not actively market that option. Mr. Trudgeon suggested that the 2011 work plan include direction for staff to make concerted outreach efforts and direct contact with housing associations in the community to determine what, if any, needs are apparent and roles the HRA could play avoid those properties deteriorating. Member Pust noted that if funds were not available, people’s expectations shouldn’t be raised. Member Pust questioned the validity of, and meaningfulness of the bank rejections meant; and whether this truly represented a last resort for the LJA or if other private financing options may be available. Member Pust cautioned the LJA that if there were other private options available to them, they should thoroughly research those options, since the government process was slower than the private financing market. Member Pust strongly encouraged the LJA to increase their monthly association fees now to avoid becoming further in arrears. Chair Maschka noted, from a financial perspective, this complex was very small and probably shouldn’t have been converted; and questioned if the banks had rejected the project based on the size of the loan being too small or based on financial impacts on the marketability of each unit.