Green Bay, WI 54303

10:30 a.m.

MEMBERS PRESENT: D. Dolan-Wallace, V. Chair; A. Nicholson; W. VandeCastle; H. Genunzio

MEMBERS EXCUSED: W. Van Ess, Chair

OTHERS PRESENT: Keith Pamperin, Rob Strong, Anne May Steffel, Anne Monday, Noel Halvorsen, Tom Dennee, Judy Nagel, Vickie Holland, Tom Landgraf

INTRODUCTIONS: K. Pamperin introduced Tom Landgraf and Vickie Holland of Dimension Development LLC Consultants. Tom and Vickie will give the Authority a presentation on the options available for the sale and/or transition of the GBHA Scattered Site Public Housing Units and opportunities to leverage financing for the elevator storage addition and resizing small units at Mason Manor. He stated he had invited Judy Nagel, President of Mutual Housing Association of Brown County, Inc., and Noel Halvorsen, Executive Director, and Tom Dennee, Project Manager, of NeighborWorks^® Green Bay representing two not-for-profit owners of scattered site properties that may be interested in participating in the transition of the Authority’s Scattered Site units or learning how they may transition or consolidate the scattered site units they currently have.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

A motion was made by W. VandeCastle, seconded by H. Genunzio, and carried to approve the minutes from the September 20, 2007, meeting of the Housing Authority of the City of Green Bay as presented.

OLD BUSINESS:

1. Presentation by Tom Landgraff Consulting, Dimension Development Group, on options for the sale and transition of the Authority’s fifty units of Scattered Site Public Housing.

K. Pamperin introduced T. Landgraf. K. Pamperin stated the Authority had contracted with Dimension Development Group to layout the options available to the Housing Authority for the sale and/or transition of the scattered sites, as well as leveraging financing for Mason Manor.

K. Pamperin stated that T. Landgraf has considerable experience in regards to housing, having developed Heartland Development while he was with Madison Gas and Electric, now WE Energy which developed dozens of tax credit developments including two in Brown County. Dimension Development works primarily with housing authorities and the majority of work done recently has been to help housing authorities redevelop aging public housing. Dimension Development has worked with the Stevens Point Housing Authority, and is currently working with Trempeleau County, Bayfield County, the City of Washburn Housing Authority, Red Cliff Housing Authority, City of Madison Housing Authority, and the City of Beloit Housing Authority. The Stevens Point area has just recently completed the redevelopment on its properties and stands as a HUD national model, being that it was redeveloped in a HUD preferred way.

T. Landgraf introduced his presentation by reviewing the source of funds available to the Housing Authority to operate its Public Housing. He then reviewed other sources that could be leveraged by the Housing Authority in addition to its Public Housing assets. T. Landgraf stated that converting properties into mixed income developments is an option and a number of housing authorities, including the Oshkosh Housing Authority, are in the process of converting their properties into mixed income developments. Tom Landgraf reviewed the current status of the GBHA public housing units and the possible changes that could be considered.

T. Landgraf reviewed options available for the Housing Authority to consider. He stated that it is possible to define different levels of affordability that might differ with single-family versus multi-family.

T. Landgraf indicated that this may be the time to consider mixing and matching the properties, getting rid of some properties and keeping others. He stated that the scattered sites could be transitioned into a rent-to-own program or sold for immediate ownership right away. It was indicated that less financing is available for the rent-to-own program and the immediate ownership option, but the majority of financing works better for renting. In addition to the variability of how the housing is used to meet the community needs is what role the GBHA chooses to maintain in ownership, asset management and tenant management. The Housing Authority could continue to own the properties and bring in a limited partner to leverage financing with the authority retaining responsibility to HUD. The Housing Authority could sell the properties but continue to manage them. However, managing the scattered site properties does not appear to be the direction the GBHA is wants to go. The Housing Authority could also consider transitioning the entire portfolio.

T. Landgraf stated that Public Housing is a valued asset that currently offers many opportunities. As a part of this asset base, the Authority has the annual contribution contract (ACC), Capital Funds Financing Program (CFFP), Operating Funds Subsidy Program, Replacement Housing Factor Funds (RHFF), Demolition and Disposition, Mixed Finance, and the opportunity of opting out of public housing and converting to Project Based Housing Vouchers. The programs available for Section 8 include portable vouchers, project-based vouchers, and Home Ownership Voucher Programs, additional funding sources available from the Federal Home Loan Bank include the Affordable Housing Program (AHP), the Community Investment Program (CIP), and Down Payment Assistance Grants. Financing tools available for affordable housing include tax credits through WHEDA, which can be a 9% Competitive Tax Credit, a 4% Automatic Credit, a 4% Acquisition Credit, and other WHEDA funding to help with GAP financing. Bonding programs available include Mortgage Revenue Bonds (MRB), 501 C (3) Bonds, or Tax Increment Bonds.

The Housing Authority has site control, zoning, community support, existing buildings, existing residents, actual revenues and expenses, operating history, redevelopment flexibility, HUD ACC Operating and Capital funds and reserves, the Section 8 Program, CFP and Replacement Housing Factor Funds, sales proceeds, and relationships with local and not-for-profit organizations.

T. Landgraf provided a breakdown of options concerning Mason Manor. He indicated that currently some units at Mason Manor might need resizing to compete in the market. Unit square footages may need to be increased to stay current with the market. Older public housing facilities could use ADA compliance improvements, and he understands that at Mason Manor installation of an additional elevator and resident storage additions are needed. Common area and parking improvements may need to be addressed as well. T. Landgraf reviewed some financing pertaining to Manor Manor remodeling, not specifically solving for what needed to be done, but how big the property could be. If CFFP funds were used as GAP financing, if a FHLBC grant was approved, if the maximum WHEDA Tax Credit application was approved in April 2008, and if all other local, state, and HUD approvals were obtained, the Housing Authority would be able to support a total of approximately $9,769,000.

Tom Landgraf introduced options available for the Housing Authority’s Scattered Site homes. According to a breakdown, the 42 scattered site units are valued at $6 million for insurance purposes, which averages approximately $120,000 per unit. Tom Landgraf indicated that although not all units are currently in the best residential locations, a majority of the units are in a “good to very good” condition. The options the Housing Authority could implement are continue as-is ownership and management, continue as-is ownership but contract out the management, sell entire portfolio at market rates and exit the Public Housing program, sell entire portfolio at affordable rates and exit the Public Housing program, sell some or all of the units to a related entity and obtain tax credit funds for improvements made, or sell individual units at affordable rates for home ownership and replace the units by purchasing and rehabilitating new units elsewhere in the City and/or the County. A further breakdown of the replacement housing options include building new scattered sites, buying and fixing up existing scattered sites, building new attached single-family or multi-family units on single or scattered sites, buying and fixing up existing attached or multi-family units on single or scattered sites, or some combination of the previously suggested options.

If the Housing Authority were to sell all of the units at market rates and replace units using Project Based Section 8 Vouchers, it would cost approximately $217,000 per unit. If the Housing Authority were to sell the units at affordable rates and replace the units using Project Based Section 8 Vouchers, it would cost approximately $189,300 per unit. If the Housing Authority were to sell all units at market rates and replace the units using Public Housing Funds, it would cost approximately $192,460 per unit. If the Housing Authority were to sell all of the units at affordable rates and replace the units using Public Housing Funds, it would cost approximately $164,600 per unit.

T. Landgraf concluded with the options available to the Housing Authority for both Mason Manor and the Scattered Site units. As a summary, the options available for Mason Manor include fixing it up, selling it, or doing nothing. The GBHA could also reconfigure Mason Manor and retain it. The options available for the scattered site units include selling some or all of the scattered sites, replace some or all of the scattered site units, contract out management, combine Public Housing properties and other affordable properties into several “strategic packages”.

T. Landgraf explained the types of tax credits available to the Housing Authority. A 9% tax credit is limited to $1.90 per capita population, is heavily demanded, generally cannot be used with other low cost debt of federal funding, has a 4% acquisition component, and works best for deep skewed rent levels. A 4% tax credit is part of IRB allocations, is $75 per capita population, is not as greatly demanded, works best with mixed-income developments, can be used with other low cost funds, and is difficult to make work with small developments. The overall limitations of tax credits include requiring at least 20 percent of the units that receive a mixture of tax credits and market rates to be set aside as affordable, the units can be a mix of ages or can be age restricted, and the incomes of residents must be re-certified annually. To apply for tax credits, the Housing Authority would have to complete a preliminary application by February 2008. The preliminary application must include evidence of site control, support letters from local units of government, evidence that zoning is or will be approved, and a market study demonstrating need. Also, additional elements that will enhance the chances of preliminary approval include enthusiastic local government support, a not-for-profit cosponsor, financial participation by the community or the not-for-profit cosponsor, and material participation in the overall development by the cosponsor.

The Authority thanked Tom and Vicki for their presentation, stating they have given the Authority a lot to think about.

K. Pamperin suggested that the Authority appoint a subcommittee of staff and Commissioners to review this data and make a recommendation to the Authority. He stated the immediate need is to secure property management for the Scattered Sites being that it is unlikely we can come to a solution by January 1, 2008. He stated he would discuss with ICS to continue our month-to-month contract with them to carry beyond January 1, however we have been notified that they are losing funds on the management contract and would like to be relieved of the burden. He stated the upcoming HUD REAC inspection and the fact that we have little or no qualified waiting list makes management more stressful. He stated he would organize the options with pros and cons for Authority discussion and consideration. It was the consensuses of the Authority too proceed in that manner.

2. Review and approval of recommended change in budget indicating the increase form the rate to charge the Amp’s (MM & SS) from $43.78 per unit rented to $46.06.

A. May Steffel presented the item. She stated the change is due to a HUD formula change in the project-based asset management being instituted.

A motion was made by W. VandeCastle, seconded by A. Nicholson, and carried to approve the recommended change to the budget.

3. Langan Investigations Report.

K. Pamperin stated there are presently two evictions being handled by Integrated Community Services legal counsel due to the fact that the City Law Department is short staffed. He stated the evictions are a result of police calls for service and investigative efforts provided by Langan Investigations regarding unreported persons living at GBHA addresses. K. Pamperin stated that it is important to the Authority that all legal eviction notices are prepared properly or the Authority will be challenged and not be able to remove the offending residents.. The City Law Department is short handed and would not be able to assist with the documents until the latter part of October, and ICS property management staff have no experience with public housing eviction regulations; therefore, he has asked ICS to use their legal counsel to guide them in preparing the documents with the Authority splitting the costs.

A motion was made by W. VandeCastle, seconded by A. Nicholson, and carried to receive and place on file.

NEW BUSINESS:

4. Review and approval of the proposal to provide appraisals for the forty-two properties totaling fifty rental units submitted by Vogels Buckman Appraisal Group.

K. Pamperin indicated that until the Authority determines which option they will use to sell or transition the Scattered Site properties, this item should be tabled until that decision is made so we are certain the appraisals meet the disposition needs.

A motion was made by A. Nicholson, seconded by H. Genunzio, and carried to table the item.

5. Review and approval of policy for use of the Reasonable Accommodation Request Form as presented.

K. Pamperin presented the item stating this format will ensure that both Mason Manor and Scattered Sites use a uniform and consistent process in determining when an applicant or existing resident requires an assist-animal that is not in compliance with the Authority’s adopted pet policy as a reasonable accommodation. He stated the form requires the physician or certified health professional to provide specific detail as to the need for assist-animal being requested.

A motion was made by W. VandeCastle, seconded by A. Nicholson, and carried to approve the policy as presented.

6. Review and adoption of The Housing Authority of the City of Green Bay Lead Paint Poisoning Policy.

K. Pamperin reported this policy details the steps that need to be taken when the Authority is notified by a public Health Department that the Authority has a child resident under the age of six that has an elevated lead blood level. The policy will be certain that each notification is handled expeditiously in a consistent manner.

A motion was made by A. Nicholson, seconded by W. VandeCastle, and carried to approve the policy as presented.

7. Authorization to request quotes and proceed with the purchase to the low bidder for approximately 1200 square yards of replacement carpeting for Mason Manor Apartments.

K. Pamperin indicated the Authority has been purchasing replacement carpet in bulk to achieve the best price for carpet and installation. The carpet is stored at the suppliers warehouse and brought to Mason Manor and installed as needed. As the existing carpet is aging we will see a need to replace more carpeting upon apartment turnover.

A motion was made by A. Nicholson, seconded by H. Genunzio, and carried to approve the item as presented.

FINANCIAL REPORT AND BILLS:

A motion was made by A. Nicholson, seconded by H. Genunzio, and carried to receive and place on file the financial report and authorize payment of the bills as presented.

OCCUPANCY AND STAFF REPORT:

It was reported that Scattered Sites properties have one vacancy with two evictions underway and Mason Manor has three.

There being no further business to come before the Authority, a motion was made by A. Nicholson, seconded by W. VandeCastle, and carried to adjourn the meeting at 12:30 p.m.