Regional Affordability Committee Meeting Transcript – 10/17/2016 Title: ATXN 24/7 Recording Channel: 6 - ATXN Recorded On: 10/17/2016 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 10/17/2016 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== [3:26:58 PM] >> Garza: I can't officially call the meeting to order because we don't have a quorum, but this has happened in the past and we went ahead with briefing. We'll go ahead and start with the first briefing -- yeah, because I can't take up one -- are there any citizens that want to speak? Okay. So then it's the staff presentation and possible discussion on basics of public improvement districts including purpose, creation and operation. Thank you all for being here. >> There we go. We don't do that at the county. My name is Jessica Rio, I'm the executive over planning and budget including our economic development and strategic investments budget. Deanna Ramirez is director of that division and she is here to present information on pid information and the wildhorse pid over this last year. I'll turn it over to her and be here as a resource. >> Thank you. And I think part of it is going to be Greg, our slides are a little interspersed. But Travis county has one active capital pid, which is wildhorse ranch which was created in August of this year and we're just at that stage, it's just been created and no further action has been taken yet. >> Good afternoon, I'm Greg canally, interim CEO for the city of Austin. We appreciate the time to kind of have this discussion about pids. We know they can be an important tool for local government. The city has three active [3:28:58 PM] capital pids, whisper valley, Indian hills and estancia. When is Travis county created wildhorse there's a process for the city to go through that in terms of a vote on letting that as a local entity [inaudible]. We just wanted to turn it back over to county and let them talk about some of their process. And then councilmember come back and talk about where we are after having been through the wildhorse discussion this past August. >> Okay. And just going over a brief history of county pids, and it's pretty brief. In October of last year, of 2015, the wildhorse ranch developer started -- submitted a petition to the county to have a pid created at the wildhorse ranch location. They had been working with the city prior to that and then came over to the county because the county had some bond funds from the 2011 bond election for the wildhorse connector road and so that was the county -- the county interest originally in this pid. In November 2015, the commissioners court assigned the pid project to the planning and budget office. In December through January the planning and budget office requested the project be delayed and not go forward until we could get a policy in place because we had not done anything with pids in the past. We hadn't used that tool. So they gave us some time. January 26th of this year the commissioners court adopted the policy. On August 2nd and 9th is commissioners court approved some decision points for administrative procedures for county staff to follow in the management of the pids. [3:30:59 PM] And then on August 9th the commissioners court created the wildhorse ranch pid and that triggered the 30-day deadline for the city of Austin to object or allow the pid to continue. And on September 1st of 2016 the city council voted not to object to that pid. The main focus of the Travis county pid policy is on the community benefits. And we have a list of benefits that we try to ensure that pid petitions can support -- they don't have to support all of them, but the more that they can hit the better for us. Everything from generating primary employment or other long-term economic benefits and by employment we mean benefits beyond the short-term highing of construction workers. Increasing affordable housing opportunities for persons of low or moderate incomes. Advancing approved master plans, and that's not just Travis county master plan such as the land water, imagine Austin, project connect, we look at all of those. Then other community benefits could be creating or enhancing parks, hike and bike trails, recreational facilities and open space or improving storm water quality, flood control benefits. And for those two specifically, they have to be benefits that exceed what's required by applicable development regulations, it has to be above and beyond not just the regular. >> Madame chair, thank you, I was going to ask a question along those lines. Are there any particular percentages or outcome measures or anything associated with these different bullet points that I see and would there be, you know, for instance, do you [3:32:59 PM] have to meet a certain number of these from the list and does each one have any percentages or outcome measures? >> And we don't have that requirement in the policy. Because when we drafted the policy, we had never done a pid. We wanted to be pretty broad and open, and because pids as we're finding out as we hear from other developers are very place based, and it really depends on where the -- the location of the pid is and the size of the pid, the amount of acreage. That really does lead to what kind of benefits we really want to get out of that location. >> But do you think that you will get anything more specific that could be applicable across the board to locations? I certainly understand a lot of it has to be tailored, but it seems there could be some number of these to meet or some measures for employment or housing that could be a baseline. Are you looking at anything like that? >> Not yet, but we're hoping we can get there. Like even with wildhorse ranch, which is the first one that's been created, we haven't started the negotiate on that yet. So we're going to try to figure out -- well, we want to make sure we set a high enough bar so that not everyone wants to rush through. >> Right. >> But that it's -- it's also attainable or achievable. So we're trying to find that sweet spot at this time. >> If I could add also, the commissioners court when they listed the community benefits that they would like to see, they also right after that listed that pids must provide multiple community benefits and affordable housing opportunities were especially important to the commissioners court. So they did state that in the policy. >> Or any percentage of housing. >> Right. >> But you are going to continue to work on that with some more specifics hopefully? >> That's what we're trying to get at, to see how detailed we [3:35:00 PM] can get. >> Right. >> Just to clarify so that nobody is left with the impression the county commissioners court isn't wanting to have something specific on affordable housing, we did receive a recommendation from staff that if we had a -- a mandatory requirement for affordable housing on site that in some cases it might cause us to run afoul of federal fair housing requirements if there resulted in an unintended overconcentration of affordable housing in a given area where fair housing rules would say you shall not do that. And so what we've asked for staff -- excuse me -- to come up with instead is a payment in lieu of mechanism, and we are in the process of actually trying to finalize that recommendation and I think are intending to go out to affordable housing advocates to get their feedback on various proposals. But our intent is to have a mechanism that either achieves affordable housing on site or a meaningful payment in lieu of into a fund because I think it's a -- it's a fairly strong sentiment on the court that we want to use the pid to achieve affordable housing. I can certainly speak for myself and say that's my primary reason for even supporting the creation of pids. >> I understand fair housing concentration as a result of the Dallas case and the new H.U.D. Regulations that were promulgated after that case and other ensuing events, but yes, it does appear that you could legally have some more specifics or outcomes without running afoul so I'm glad you are looking at those. And fee in lieu is, of course, something that the councilmembers here know a lot about from density bonus and fee in lieu. My only thought on that would [3:37:02 PM] be certainly fee in lieu could be productive, but you don't want fee in lieu to turn to a situation where you never -- the opposite of an overconcentration, never having any housing where you want it. >> Some of the other community benefits the commissioners court has indicated include increasing or enhancing mass transit, bicycle-pedestrian, carpooling, any option other than more single occupancy vehicles. Improveing programs, facilities, we're basically facing on capital. Providing exceptional benefits to improve the public roadway network in the county and that is excluding the projects internal streets. This would be the larger arterials. Ensuring superior land uses within the pid because, as you know, the county doesn't really have land use authority and this is one tool that can give us a little bit of a leg up in that area. And then incorporate more than minimal green building standards. In addition, we do require consistency with better builder program, and that includes prevailing wage, provision of prevailing wage or Travis county living wage to construction workers, whichever is higher. Osha 10 training, provision of worker's comp insurance, independent monitoring of construction sites approved by Travis county and recruiting of 30% of construction workforce from local dol certified apprentice programs or other programs that provide bilingual instruction for Travis county. That would be financed by pid assessments or pid bond proceeds. >> Thanks, Deanna. [3:39:04 PM] Where the city of Austin is at this point, we do have an existing public improvement district policy. It dates back to 2008. And it's similar to where the county is, although I think they have certainly advanced it and put a lot more meat on the bones than we have. This is very kind of big picture thinking about the idea of getting extraordinary public benefits for the idea of accessing tax exempt debt at its core. That's kind of the fundamental issue that we arrive at. And looking for similar outcomes, public infrastructure, [inaudible], housing, public transportation. >> Can you explain for people listening the benefit of tax exempt debt? >> Certainly. Tax exempt debt obviously comes with the ability to bar bar -- borrow at lower rates and from a developer's perspective it helps the -- kind of the proforma of the project when you are going from kind of commercial rates to a more tax exempt rate, there's going to be a benefit there. But with that benefit -- accruing that benefit, the city would ask for, again, for the public benefits to be in line with that. >> Kitchen: Wherever it fits, would you talk about how a pid is initiated? And why someone would initiate a pid? >> Certainly. And let me -- I will -- councilmember, I'm -- yes, appreciate that. One of the aspects for the city as well is because ultimately public improvements would be brought into the city, we want to make sure that the standards and specifications are met just at a core level. Given the discussions that the -- that we have had with our city council, really over the past year both related to our existing pids as well as the discussion from late summer in conjunction with the [3:41:05 PM] county on wildhorse, one of our recommendations from September was for the city to do an update to the pid policy. I think some of the under currents have changed enough that warrants us to look at that modeling in many cases what the county process has gone through, look at other best practices around the state for what we can point to. And really have a pause in our -- the creation of any new pids until we go through that process. So that is something that we have -- we have -- we have initiated within city staff, but we also know we want to have stakeholder involvement to make sure we're touching all the aspects of this as we go through it. We hope to kind of complete that work in the winter so we can get back in front of council for an initial set of reactions. In terms of the creation of pids, it is initiate with a notice, it's dictated by state law. Developers can approach either the city or county for the creation -- the creation of a district. When that is initiated, there are some time lines that are triggered and one of the things that has to occur obviously when you are talking about the use of tax exempt debt is a due diligence on a pure basis on the financials of the project as well as trying to get into these other policy objectives. So that's how they get initiated. As we look at the policy from a city perspective, we also want to have in place a set of procedures, again I think like the county has done it really helps both staff and ultimately when they are providing recommendations to our city council that the procedures were met and how both on the application side during the discussion time and then post-creation about the procedures how they are going to manage. We think that will help us kind of tighten it up and also make sure it is an informed process from start to finish. [3:43:12 PM] >> Garza: The end of your presentation? >> Yes. Questions? >> Kitchen: So I'm trying to think through -- because we only have a couple of the -- we won't have a couple pids, but we only have three in the county as -- and the county has one. Can you talk to me about from are developer perspective or maybe Terry would have a perspective on this, so it doesn't look like it's a tool that's used very often. Is that fair to say or -- >> In terms -- I think it's a question we would get at in terms of the ultimate total number of units that are being created around -- in Travis county and city of Austin and how many units [inaudible]. I would say looking back historically in terms of the city of Austin having been through some fairly big development, now know idea of the city's population double every 20 years and that our first pid dates back to 2010, I think that gets at it at some respects. Certainly the timing of that given where we were in the economic cycle, I think that may have a factor, but I certainly would also be interested in Terry's input on this or thoughts on this. >> Thank you. Pids are -- people are looking at them more and more for a variety of reasons. And I'm managing a project not in Austin that's looking at one so I have first- hand experience as we're looking at this. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Governments are, you know, developers are paying more and more of regional infrastructure and that costs a lot and it becomes very difficult to finance. And so pids are the one tool where you can prospectively, you can put -- you can issue bonds based on current values to put in infrastructure that [3:45:14 PM] there's nothing there yet. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> If it's a mud or municipal management district, you have to expend the money and then create the tax base and it pays for past expenses. My perception is that the muds and municipal management districts are probably a little safer, but the pids become very attractive because they become a long-term financial tool for developer rather than short-term or investor capital to do that. And so -- and they are very flexible. That's the positives. The negatives are they cost more in terms of cost of funds than a tax exempt because these are not tax exempt to the developer. So you are paying a higher rate because it's taxable to the investor. Instead of it being -- I was told the last couple of weeks if you were doing a mud bond today, it would be around 3.75% for a healthy mud. The pid was 7.5% is what they were quoting us. By the time you pull out the various fees and consultant, the effective rate was over 12 and that's really expensive. So you will see them a lot and you will see them not for -- I don't think you will see them for huge things because 12% is more than a lot of developers make so you wouldn't do that. Its biggest attractive, you can define it however you want and finance things prospectively so that's the value. >> I think that's -- from a -- from an analysis perspective and due diligence perspective, I think that's where the -- going through that process of trying to determine the future, look at that in terms of the issuing debt on the prospective is where the - - there's an inherently different set of risk factors in terms of the due diligence effort. Not that it's -- obviously we've been through it before, but it's something we look at [3:47:17 PM] carefully, work with our financial advisers, the developers as we go through that process. >> Garza: The way you just described it, if it's so much higher for a pid, why would a developer pick a pid over a mud? Only because you have that secure -- the prospective part? >> The prospective part plays a role. Sometimes jurisdictions don't want to create muds. But it -- most of the time it's the prospective ability to do it. I will also say it's a little -- the project that I'm working on is a predominantly commercial project with some multi-family housing, and some of the pids that you see, whispering valley, wildhorse, are predominantly residential. And this is my opinion, but it's been told to me that if the residential is -- it's easier to pass on the cost of the pid because the buyer of a home is looking at saying what's my monthly payment and whether it's up or down 20 or 30 dollars makes a difference. It's been pointed out if we're doing a big expensive commercial project paying $50,000 a year extra in a pid tax, that takes millions off their back-end value when it's time for a investor to sell the project so they don't want to do that so they are fighting that. I think -- the better way to say it they are probably more sophisticated in their understanding of it, but you don't -- give me opinion, but I think -- I think the prospective value is the biggest deal because it -- you can go issue a 20-year bond for a big waterline or a big road or whatever and you are making an annual payment then for 20 years rather than trying to do bank debt, which, you know, is short-term debt or investors, which is very expensive money. Does that make sense? >> Garza: Uh-huh. Go ahead. >> Shea: I can certainly [3:49:18 PM] relay some of the information that came up in the course of our discussion about creating a pid policy because we just created it this last year at the county, and one of the major concerns that was raised came from former county judge bill Aleshire. And he said from his research the -- one of the dangers or down sides in pids is the -- is the risks associated with it because the developers get the money up front, not after they've built the development and the development is paying revenue from the property taxes or whatever the assessment is. There's a greater financial risk associated with it, and he said that was part of the reason why the interest rate was higher. Because Wall Street essentially charged an additional fee commensurate with the risk. And so that -- that has raised questions for me. I do hear a lot of talk from some of our staff about concerns about a bubble. We've had this long stretch of time now where real estate values have been increasing and there is a rush. We've seen -- is it six pid applications now that have been filed with the county? So we haven't approved -- >> Five. >> Shea: Five in addition to wildhorse. >> Four in addition. >> Shea: Maybe we just heard about some. So we know there are others that are considering filing a pid application, and I think that number is over four additional. [Inaudible] More than four. And so one of the questions I have is if the pid developers get the approvals, if they essentially sell the debt and get the funds, but the market turns down again and they are not able to get the development that they were anticipating because there's a market downturn, who is stuck [3:51:18 PM] then? Because that's not clear to me who gets stuck holding the bag. >> Right, and part of the reason for the higher interest rate and the risk is that the bondholder, right? And what happens is you do want to have that loan to value ratio of at least three to one, so the land undeveloped has to be worth three times more than whatever the pid bonds that you are selling. And so the theory that's out there is that no -- no developer will want to lose that amount of land, that value of land for that value of bond. So they will work hard to try to keep it. And also within thing that a pid bond underwriter that we've been talking to at the county has brought to our attention is that this summer one of the last pid bond issuance, and it was for pid bonds in north Texas, came in and it was for an initial bond, it wasn't after buildout so you have, you know, more security there, but it came in under 5%. On the sale. So it was the first one that has ever come in that low on an initial bond -- bond sale. So it's starting to look like perhaps the bond market is starting to understand better this -- this tool. >> It's also a little different in the sense pids are assessments, they are not a tax. So like for example if we all comprised a pid, if I didn't pay, then it doesn't affect your -- you just keep making your payments and annual assessment and it doesn't effect and the bondholder would foreclosure on me. In a mud or municipal management district it's everybody. If three of us stop paying, then your tax rates go up very high and the whole thing collapses. There's a mitigation in that. >> Shea: In that regard, that is one of the concerns [3:53:19 PM] that I have about pids. I think the first one that's working through the system is looking somewhere around a thousand dollar a year assessment on top of property taxes, and I believe they are also planning a hoa annual fee in addition to the pid assessment. >> Homeowners association. >> Homeowners association fee on top of the pid assessment. Those numbers can get fairly high depending on the size of the pid bond that's borrowed. That's is one of the concerns I have particularly related to affordability. >> Commissioner, as we go through our -- had our initial discussions about crafting a policy or enhancing our policy, I should say, is that is certainly a factor that we're looking at knowing that at the front end the assessment is really for the landowner, the developer, and trying to project out that long- term kind of fiscal impact both on the long-term operty owners where they are from a location perspective and certainly we believe, again, this is for us as we go through our policy, this in itself is good input and feedback about that. It kind of looking at that as one of a -- as a criteria that needs to be at a minimum evaluated with some sensitivity because it is an important factor that we don't want to create an issue that in five, ten years is back in front of us to have to sort through another way. >> Kitchen: So help me understand how it works with the city ultimately taking ownership of the public improvements. >> So -- and I'll speak to this as much as I can, but ultimately I need to get our real estate folks -- >> Kitchen: Let me back up. I'm focusing on the affordable [3:55:20 PM] housing component of it. So does that speak to affordable housing or is that just the streets and -- >> Yeah, I think, councilmember, that was talking about any subdivision going through its process of building roads and water, wastewater infrastructure, it becomes part of the city's network and assets. In terms of affordable housing, each one as you go through any specific process, the -- typically associated with the pud, if there was a pud is housing would be worked out. The types of financing, long-term affordability, but that is specifically about our infrastructure. >> Kitchen: So the value from an afordability standpoint is perhaps the potential to get affordable housing where you might not otherwise. Is that what you would say, Terry? Do you think that from a developer's standpoint -- I get it in terms of, you know, what it does for them in terms of financing. But do you think that -- that has the potential to translate into greater affordable housing or are we really stuck with the kind of scenario that commissioner Shea mentioned? Or you may have a perspective on that too. >> Sorry. No matter how you look at it, a pid is on top of your taxes. Every community we build does have a hoa because it's the self-regulating, self-enforcement, maintenance and values, et cetera, that cities are not, you know, designed to handle. And so you need both of them. And so I don't know where that upper limit is. You know, Houston's values are lower and the average tax rate is over three bucks there every year. And so I think that's what keeps values down some because the payment's really high for even on a home that's less expensive. I don't have a clear answer. I -- you know, in the one pid [3:57:23 PM] that we have been discussing, they've talked about the governmental entity that's considering it has said they would want 10% of the proceeds to use as they wish. So if somebody was using 10% of the proceeds for affordable housing that's fine. In my mind for our purposes, that makes it less desirable, which is fine, but we're different, but my effective cost of capital goes up because I'm paying 5.5% or 6% or whatever it is less all those proceeds. And so it keeps going up. But it could. It is a tool that could be used for affordable housing if that was the direction proceeds needed to be directed. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Councilmember, again, I think the conversation is valuable as we kick our process off and it's that balancing as we come back to our city council with a recommendation that the front end affordability of getting into it compared with ability to stay affordable, looking at all-in costs, all-in fees, kind of similar how we look at our budget process, we try to show full on taxpayer impact not only from tax rates but from our fees and so we believe that should be part of the exercise in determining the evaluation and criteria for bringing these back to our city council to get at that exact issue, that balance between it's affordable on the front end, but if it's hard to energy efficiency programs okay it affordable from a year in, year out perspective, that's certainly what we're looking at. Trying to understand more, trying to dive a little more which I think is valuable. It's a good time to take what is a broad policy statement and similar to what the county has had to go through, look at it from maybe a more fine point, finer points added onto it. >> There's one distinction I want to make between a pid or mud. A pid is an assessment. So if you are doing it on raw [3:59:23 PM] land, you know, I'll use an example. If you were doing $10 million on 500 acres, that would be -- what is that? Is that 200,000 an acre? No, that's not >> I'm sorry, if you do 10 million -- I'm gonna use the exact example of the brokerage I'm involved in, 10 million divided by 720 acres is $13,800 and then if you were doing residential and you were doing five units per acre, that works out to a $2,700 P.I.D. -- Assessment per house and that never goes up. It's not -- it's not a tax rate. It's fixed. You see what I'm saying? Any time you want to, for example,, when we were analyzing hours we said at $13,000 an issuing if we're selling commercial property at 250 an acre we may just take that 20 cents an acre and pay it off so it's not a concern insofar commercial business to say it's gonna hurt my back-end values, just pay it off. It doesn't go up with the values, if that makes any sense. >> Yeah. So yes. And I think that's important. I mean, we've seen salesperson assessments for a long time in local government and municipal government, somebody wants streetlights or something in their subdivision, do you a special assessment but it's typically for something fixed in that nature or has been used in that way, and it's finite. Here what you're describing is bonds being sold but not backed with property taxes or other revenues from, for instance, water and wastewater system as with the mud and some of these property taxes but with these special assessments. And these -- if you go through this vehicle that we're talking about they're getting the tax-exempt rate, correct? >> Again, I think it gets back to where the market is setting the rate. >> Because you were saying -- and that's what -- you were sailing that the difference [4:01:24 PM] between a mud and a pid, a couple things. The pid can pay for I was on the front end versus a mud can't but you were saying on a pid that your interest rate, what you were saying, wouldn't be tax-exempt, it would be 12%. >> Let me rephrase it. >> Okay. >> It's 5% or 6% or 7%. The effective rate to me by the time they do tax reserves and paid consultants or whatever was 12%. >> Exactly. I want to make that clear. We are talk tax-exempt rates here so you were adding other costs on to that. >> Right, exactly. >> Your interest rates. >> The effective rate to me. >> Yeah. That's what I want to make clear, you're talking about the effective rate to you with your additional costs which certainly is important when you're looking at a business person at your effective rate, but it is the rate itself on the debt is the tax-exempt rate that you're getting. >> Correct. And it's not similar to -- it is a tax-exempt rate -- >> But it's not the same as a aaa rating [overlapping speakers] >> That needs to be -- that's an excellent point. You're not looking at 3%, 4%. >> Like when we used to do the lease purchase, you know, financings. With those you did not get the aaa or aa of the city or county and you had to look at the underlying structure there and the collateral, so to speak, of those lease purchases and they were rated on that. Here you're getting -- you're getting a bond rating on this financing, not just getting the city's or the county's and the market is gonna take into account as you said, in the interest rate it's risk versus reward, right. >> Of each property. >> Exactly. >> Each development. >> Exactly. >> And they -- you can see some variation in there. >> Right. >> It's interesting to see that the rate has changed from the original ones we have or has come down but I think that's probably a factor of other kind of the just Texas [4:03:24 PM] economy. >> Not just Texas economy. We're seeing for the -- right now, actually, a slowdown in the municipal any market so you have to -- muni market. You have to deal with market variations we're seeing right now plus the individual issue and even though it's tax-exempt, what the market is considering the risk on that and the rating assigned, therefore, the interest rate. But it is a tax-exempt. You have to add on your other costs, of course. Okay. I just want to make that clear. >> Just for -- for clarification, the bondholder is a bank, right? Or -- >> It's not the county or the city. >> No, it's not the county or city. >> Investor, okay. >> Investors. >> Does anybody else have any questions? I just have a -- >> You go first. >> I just have a comment. I hope as we're -- I know the county is considering their policy and the city is relooking at a policy, and I hope we really take an aggressive approach to requirements of these, because I'm still learning exact -- trying to wrap my ahead around exactly what these things do, but it sounds -- it's a financing -- mechanism that brings great benefit to the developer and in exchange, you know, we ask for these benefits. What I've seen in my short 21 months is when we're trying to have those negotiations during P.U.D. Negotiations, it's so hard to get a 1% more affordability housing and, you know, I think we approved one where we got 3.5 because we couldn't get the other .5, you know? So I really hope that it's -- and like you explained, it's that sweet spot in that it has to be a good deal for the investors but at the same time it has to be a good deal for the city too that has appropriate benefits. And so I hope we shoot high. [4:05:26 PM] You know, when I see 5%, I don't want to see 5%. I want to see 25%, you know, affordable housing. [ Laughter ] >> And if there's, you know, federal housing laws, I'm sure there's some way we can massage that where maybe it's not subsidized housing and that's what I think the federal housing rules dictate. >> With the tax credits. >> It can be mover attainable housing, market rate affordable for families. So it's not necessarily -- and I don't think -- I don't think market rate affordable -- and that's a different number to different people. I don't think they have to abide by those clusters of -- that I know of. So anyway. Just my thoughts. >> I was also gonna add that it might be helpful to be -- it might be helpful to have similar, if not the same, affordable housing kinds of approaches between the city and the county. >> I'm very interested in that. >> Yeah. You know, because that might be helpful. So this is a good time to have those discussions as both -- both he is not entities are getting more involves and we're developing our requirements now and stuff. So let me ask you just -- this is probably a basic question that -- >> Can I interrupt you for just one second if I can call the meeting to order? >> Yes. >> At -- we can't call it. >> N it's past time. >> Yeah, after half hour. >> That's right, that's right. Okay. >> Right. So my staff totally broke down this morning. [ Laughter ] >> I'm just saying. By the way, the rest of us, the boards, we're all dropping like flies, we're getting sick because we're doing all our own work and all that kind of stuff and we're just like -- so I'm the only healthy one at present, and if I sound unhealthy, it's just allergies. [4:07:26 PM] I really am sorry but this was not on my calendar and my apologies. >> Don't worry about it. Stay strong for the rest of your -- >> I was gonna finish my thought. So okay. So, yeah. So I think informs talking about the fact that perhaps we can collaborate on the -- so the question I was gonna ask is P.I.D.S are only applicable to a city or a county, right? Okay. And where -- can you tell us where the four other -- did you say four in addition to -- >> We have two petitions that came in for the same P.I.D. But one is city of Austin etj and then it splits over into manor etj and that one is not complete so I haven't accepted the tet ignition, even though I have it -- petition even though I have it between wildhorse ranch and manor, so that's bridging that gap right, therefore. There's one we do have the petition in, it's turner's crossing, and it's just north of the hays Travis county line and it's east of I-35, about a mile, and straddles sh-45. So that's that one. Then the last one that we just received the petition a week and a half ago is Bella Fortuna, and that's north of turner's crossing and it would extend pleasant valley ready and be on either side of it. That one is much smaller. >> Okay. When it's in the city's etj, does that impact the city/county -- the rules that are in place for -- the city -- I can't even -- you know what I'm saying? >> No, no. There's a joint approach to regulation. The city can -- [4:09:28 PM] >> Yeah, thank you. So okay. >> Yes. And -- >> That one is potentially a joint? >> Right. And I believe that is. For sure the Bella Fortuna and then the turner's crossing also because they're both etj. >> Okay. >> City etj. Basically most of Travis county is someone's etj. >> Right. >> Just a little bit of property over way west that's not etj. So, yes, we have not only in the policy but now with the procedures the commissioners court approved more comprehensive ways of notifying the cities that are involved and making sure that we're working staff to staff among the different departments. So our transportation, natural resources office with the city's. >> This is an aside and I won't take too much time with it but the joint code review could use more work in terms of collaboration, not the process. I think our staffs are collaborating. But the rules. I mean, some of them are like this. As opposed to like this. So that's something for further discussion. >> That sounds like a great subject for future discussion. I think there's another P.I.D., and I don't know where it stands in terms of their planning but it's called entrada. >> Right. >> It's northeastish. >> It's city of Austin etj also but it's just south of pflugerville, just south east of northeast metro park. That one, though, they haven't turned in a petition because they found out recently that the city of Austin's annexing them and the annexation plan for them. So first thing I did is, after everything happened about wildhorse, told them, look, if you're in the city of Austin and you don't meet our policy that says for areas within city limits, you know, P.I.D.S created by the municipality are preferred and generally court will consider P.I.D. Petitions for property [4:11:29 PM] in municipal limits only if the project will enhance or assist in completing a county project or the P.I.D. Includes property within an unincorporated area. So it spans both city limits and unincorporated or some other municipality's etj. We're not getting back into the business of getting in city limits, and so they've been going back to the drawing board, trying to figure out what they're gonna do, but I haven't heard back from them. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I certainly concur with -- to the extent that the policies that are being developed can be, if not the same, similar and congruent. That would be excellent. I'm not gonna repeat my questions for the county, for the city. They're the same questions. But I do think it is important to talk about long-term affordability because we talked about the assessment and the costs ended up of initially being able to get into the housing but we really I think need to focus on that long- term affordability because that is a continuing issue that we're seeing more and more. So and I certainly understand that we need to make -- if we want to achieve some affordable housing from this tool, it needs to be an attractive tool or developers won't use it. On the other hand, the developers are getting the benefit of that tax-exempt rate and so there's that balance of not just an amount of affordable housing but that -- wanting to see that long-term affordability. >> Where is information or is information available on the petitions that you've received, as far as the maps specifically is what I'm looking for? >> Yes. We're behind on getting that up on our website, but I can send information out to anybody who is interested. The actual petition electronically that has the maps, happy to do that for everyone in the group. >> Okay. And then for turner's crossing [4:13:29 PM] and Bella Fortuna specifically, how large are those? >> Turner's crossing is about 450 acres if I remember correctly. It's under 500. And Bella Fortuna is smaller than that. So they're pretty -- they're not heighth. They're not like wildhorse. >> For me personally, the concern is once you start developing out in that area, the flooding that's gonna happen and cause other flooding. >> Right. >> That's huge. I've lived in that area 20 years. >> That's one of the issues we've talked with the turner's crossing folks a lot, and we've Clyde our stormwater management group in our -- included our stormwater management group in our initial meetings with the turner's crossing developers and they have been doing a lot of extra work trying to get us information and studies about how they would mitigate for stormwater flows. You know, we're still in the initial faces of -- phases of high level due diligence and as we move forward if commissioners court decides to create that P.I.D., then -- and then if the city, you know, decides not to object within the 30-day time frame, then we would get into the really detailed due diligence and we would really -- we would require a lot of engineering work to be done beforehand. >> In addition to that, I'd like to actually have the request that y'all speak to the citizens that have lived there for a number of years. Just because I can show you pictures of flooding where if we walk out there today you're, like, what flooded? >> Right. Exactly. I know Travis county is right now working on the disaster recovery that big cdbg, not big, but it's more money than we had before, coming through the general land office to be divvied up among city of Austin and the other jurisdictions that were impacted by the last couple of floods. So I know that it's top on [4:15:31 PM] everyone's mind, especially in southeastern Travis county. >> I want to point out, that's the difficult decision -- or place I find myself in with these. Because a lot of -- a lot of times people think, don't approve that P.I.D. Because you're gonna cause more flooding, but the P.I.D. Actually requires more flood mitigation than would have been required had you not given the P.I.D. So I think it's a tough position because there was a P.U.D. In my district that I abstained on because I couldn't stop it even if the entire council voted against it. They could have still built there and it would have been with less flood mitigation than approving the P.U.D. So it's a really difficult position, and it's so hard to explain that to the communities when they're seeing flooding in their community and to them they say you're adding more impervious cover and you're making it worse. I have to say actually by approving that we probably made it a little bit better than it would have been but it's such a hard concept to explain sometimes. Ann, I think you had your hand up. >> I wanted to add on to a few things that Dr. Greenberg mentioned and several of you, number 1 about developers. They -- that's the information and so for them to not feel like they should contribute to that or somehow make it possible for people to live there, of limited means, et cetera, et cetera, I think it's a moral obligation on their hard and I know many of you have said this before too, they're benefiting from government and yet they want to escape from as many governmental regulations as possible. There are a lot of good developers out there, but I think sometimes developers think bottom line and that's the market philosophy that unfortunately dominates our society today and I think we need to get away from that and think about the common good. I would appeal to developers to think that way. What you've mentioned in terms of all the intricacies, all the layers of laws and that kind of thing, that's, you know, that's an artifact of our government, and I think [4:17:31 PM] this is a great time for us to be looking at excavating all that stuff and seeing how we can work together. Bottom line we need to collaborate altogether. We've been doing that. For people that don't think we should be doing that, this rugged individualism that's been promoted for the last 35 years or so, it's really not word of god very well. When you don't think of the common good everybody eventually suffers. You may be a short-term thinker and not see that but I think what we're trying to do and I'm proud of this committee for doing is looking long-term but thick short-term, both aspects of that, ask thinking of the common good instead of the individual good. If the common good is served the individuals benefit eventually, every kind of aspect. I would appeal to developers to sit down with some of us and talk about how we can do the best for everybody, make affordability something for everybody because when you do that, when you lay that foundation, then everybody benefits. We have a better, cleaner, safer, more attractive world, people are happier and I think that's the ultimately goal, right? So I appreciate y'all's presentation. I'm sorry, I missed it, I can read it because I'm a reading teacher and I read it. By the way I spent enough time working with all the local governments because that's where the runner meets the road, right? That's what affects our daily life, although we have a lot of Americans who get distracted by shiny glittery things like federal elections and things like that. We ought to pay more attention here, some of had them do, they're getting there. The education piece is a big one. I appreciate Dr. Greenberg in the lbj school after fairs because that helps educate our leaders, gets them ready and our students and all the way through. So I'll get off my soapbox. Thank you. >> One of the things that we have paid particular attention to in the discussions with the P.I.D. Proposals, because they come in and meet with commissioners at an early stage before they actually file the application, so one [4:19:32 PM] of the questions that we've been asking them, with our development review staff in the meetings, is exactly the issue you raised around flooding. Particularly because a couple of these proposed P.I.D.S are in areas that have experienced flooding. And we -- we I think have put a significant emphasis and the developers come in with proposals that already include what they say are oversized detention ponds to catch stormwater. So we're pushing them on that. It's definitely an issue that's on the front burner for us. We get a weekly up date still on the status of the flood aftermath so we're very mindful of it but I appreciate you raising it. The other issue we're really struggling with is, I would say, the best way to try and get as much affordable housing as possible. A number of the P.I.D. Proposals we've talked about having low market rate housing prices, and the issue that we've pointed out is that the initial sale of the house might be considered affordable, but ever after that it's permanently lost to the affordable housing stock. So we are -- we're really pushing hard to try and figure out mechanisms that would maintain permanent affordable housing stock. And really looking both through this effort and also with the giant subcommittee on how to help ensure that. And I know that we're looking to try and have similar kinds of costs with our P.I.D. Policy. We're looking at what the P.I.D. Filing fee is so that we don't represent the bargain basement P.I.D. Filing fee. So I think whenever we can try and have our policies align, it would be a tremendous benefit for the community so we don't end up essentially with people venue shopping to figure out where they can get [4:21:32 PM] the better deal on a P.I.D. Because ultimately the P.I.D. Gets more money into the hands of the developer up front. We need to make sure we get really clear, identifiable, extra on the one hand public benefits out of the P.I.D. >> Anybody want to move on to the next item? Thank you all for being here, for coming and presenting. It's staff presentation on involvement coordination related to surplus public land for creating affordable housing. Madam chair and committee members, Bert Lumbreras, assistant city manager with community services. I'm joined by Rebecca and Greg canally, our interim cfo. We preserve the invite to present the intergovernmental coordination for affordable housing that we're very excited about. Some context and then Rebecca will walk you through a powerpoint that we have developed for this afternoon. The approach that we're looking at here is centered on creating much needed affordable housing that we believe does not exist and it's something that obviously is very much needed in our community. It's a focus on specific employee targeted sectors, like teachers, teachers aides, lower paid employees in each of our respective entities that is critical to the quality of life and our success as a community. It's gonna utilize the approach of taking advantage of surplus land initially from the city, aisd and county and obviously couple available programs or resources that are -- that have worked in our community in the past. It's gonna help individuals and families become first time home buyers or for those that, you know, we need to put them in a much more affordable situation to be able to live in our community. [4:23:33 PM] Staff is gonna be utilizing the community land trust model. We'll talk about that. Rebecca will explain it. Essentially what that does, takes the land out of the real estate equation or the real estate transaction. It's gonna provide a much more affordability options to those who need it the most. And achieve permanent affordability. I think that was one of the things you just talked about. So Rebecca is gonna walk you through the powerpoint. It's gonna talk a little bit about the affordability issue, the needs we have already seen based on reports that have been out in the community for certain employees and family types. She's also gonna talk about the use of the public lands and then also talk a little about the past history and background and the community land trust model and then our plan moving forward. Then after the presentation we'll certainly be available to answer any questions. >> Good afternoon, committee members. Delighted to be here, Rebecca, assistant director with neighborhood housing and community development office. I typically always start with a definition of what do we mean when we say affordable? And we use the language around affordable housing and affordability differently sometimes. So by affordable housing what we mean is the federal government defines housing as affordable if no -- no more than 30% of the household's monthly income is needed for rent, mortgage payments and utilities. That said, what we mean when we say household affordability embraces also not just taxes, utilities, but oftentimes transportation. And certainly when we talk to many individuals in our community, it can oftentimes embrace even child care. We do, in the context of the housing programs that we facilitate in the housing [4:25:33 PM] departments, speak in terms of median family income. So we always like to provide the chart reflecting the current mfis today of specifically those lower levels that we actually facilitate through the programs in nhcd. This particular slide I just think is very well done, and it's put together by housings, and it's been recently updated. They update this to reflect the professions in the community at particular income levels. And I think where this conversation is with the joint subcommittee, which we'll talk a little about their work currently, it is focused more in the areas where you see low-wage workers, the low-income families and moderate-income families and it providers ranges of incomes and professions that are currently at those income ranges. And the important thing to note here is that even when you look at the spectrum to the right and you recognize that therein lies professions like social workers, elementary school teachers, paralegals and even further to the right where you see database administrators and teachers at other levels, there is a need for affordable housing specifically at these levels. And so it becomes a conversation on how do you develop tools, revenues, and different practices that are going to provide housing opportunities, and oftentimes within these income ranges there's different tools and different mechanisms to do that, and that's part of the discussion we're having here today. And then, finally, one of the housekeeping slides we like to go over is just a little bit about what was touched on actually in the P.I.D. Conversation. There is affordable housing oftentimes already that is market-rate affordable. [4:27:34 PM] And this is where a preservation strategy is so crucial, because where you do have market rate affordable, you also have a need to in tandem preserve what is affordable while creating new opportunities as well. And when we talk about affordable housing that is not produced at market rate, it really is a language that we use. It's income-restricted. And we create income-restricted affordable housing opportunities really in two different ways. We do that through regulations and incentives and that's why the codenext conversation is so crucial right now, and examples around how we're doing that right now is through the developer incentive programs. And then to the right we also facilitate that through subsidized affordable housing. And two examples that I can give you are the housing that's being produced by the $120 million that have been approved in general obligation bonds by Austin voters and then through the use also of public lands, which is a great example, which is what we're here to discuss a little bit about in terms of the joint subcommittee and the council's work. I think for this group, what we wanted to highlight is what is being facilitated by the joint subcommittee, which is an excellent culmination of talent by not just the Travis county commissioners court but also the trustees of the Austin ISD and the Austin city council. And the culmination of the conversations there have turned to the use of public lands as an incredible opportunity and one that should be analyzed by the three governing entities for opportunity for affordable housing. So we're here today to talk a little bit about where they're at in that imitation the policy -- conversation and policy work. [4:29:34 PM] Certainly you all know that to create community benefits. The joint concern by governing entities is to create potentially housing that provides opportunities for the employees who can have opportunities to live in Austin. An objective is to create housing opportunities at income ranges for working families at diverse income ranges and recognizing that this has really been a conversation that many planning entities have been having for a while, and so it is not to disenfranchise even conversations that have been going on as early as 2007 with the family -- >> Finish your thought. >> With groups like the family incentives task force, which made recommendations very early on actually to the joint subcommittee I think in 2009. >> We can talk about this more beyond the city, county and school district. We've had some very beginning discussions at capital metro for example, and there may be -- I don't know if there's other entities out there, but I'd like to expand the conversation as broadly as we can in terms of whatever public entities there are that have -- >> I think that's an excellent point. What we're here today is to highlight some of the work by the joint subcommittee but absolutely I think that -- certainly the work at the community level has even been broader than just the three entities there. >> Is the joint subcommittee, is that always been city, county, aid? >> Yes, it has. I've been with the city ten years and it's always been like that. I think at one time there was an invite ended to ACC, and I don't know the specifics as to why, but it's always been those three entities with at one time an invite to ac: >> Okay, thanks. >> When I was on the city council in '93 it was the city, the county and the school district but I do know there's an interest, someone [4:31:36 PM] from the del valle school district has reached out to commissioner Gomez and inquired if they could also be included and we didn't know the mechanism for expanding it but certainly there's an interest in trying to have as many parties participate as possible. >> And I would add that that fits in with part of our strategic plan, where we have requested and I think we need to prioritize it and get it on an agenda, to have staff working together. This is excellent, excellent work that you all are doing from the city, county, school district, I applaud it. But to get staff involved from, whether it's Austin community college or , at central health, we have clinics on southeast health and wellness, we're very excited that the guy her man clinic will be on our land there for more mental health capacity. Of course there is the redevelopment of the Brackenridge hospital campus. We have an rfq that has gone out and an rfp will be going out after the new year. We'll have to see what comes back from developers on that. But I do really concur with councilmember kitchen, think that we should move up as a priority how we can get others involved in this great work and to see what usable land we actually have available for permanent affordable for workers -- affordability for workers. >> Including -- didn't we have some land recently related -- that was txdot land? So I think that we should consider that also. >> It was the grove. >> No. >> We're not talking about the grove? >> No, I'm talking about something else. >> And we need to keep in mind that there could be other possibilities with state land, whether it is land where a facility, a hospital for mental health has been located or one for folks with developmental disabilities. And as we know, if you own the land, you have a lot more [4:33:36 PM] control over it. >> Also, ACC's board of trustees has no committees. They don't do any committees. They only meet like four times a year so there's a structural problem there. We've tried that and they should absolutely be involved but I would be talking about to their staff, talking about to the board of trustees to see if there's a way they can change their structure and that's why they don't get involved in a lot of stuff they absolutely should be involved. Capital metro has a lot of spare land. Just saying. [ Laughter ] And senator Watson has recently made the statement I saw it it in the statesman where he was interested in developing the ash into some kind of a mental health facility that could serve a large community here and we would love to be a part of that because aid is being recognized nationally for its mental health outreach, we have counselors, licensed mental health counselors now in a lot of campuses to work with our young people. That's something that we would absolutely want to share our expertise with and dovetail with anything that senator Watson is interested in doing with that state property on the Austin state hospital. A lot of good things are happening that announces the time for us -- now is the time for us to collaborate. Really good time for that to happen. >> Just as a side note, thank you for this information. It directly dovetails. I'm sitting here rapidly counting and I'm gonna run out of time so I'm not gonna do it. The issue we have in housing is sometimes I don't grasp and I'm in the business so I should know, but the grasp of the problem is bigger than we think, if that makes any sense. I recently, August 29, did a survey. I looked in this book here. Have any of you ever seen this book? The builders ties in it all of their speculative inventory in the metropolitan area and it's a way for them -- it saves them money because they then don't have to advertise in mls is my opinion this petition deliver it to large realtor [4:35:36 PM] houses so realtors have this information available to them. We always look and it dawned on me recently, we look at, you know, a number of people in a family, median household size is 2.6. When it's 2.6, I look at that our median income is 64,000. So I called a broker a couple of mortgage brokers and said whacked somebody at a median household afford and they said between un80 and 220. Just assume 200. He said the challenge with that is it would be closer to 220 if there was no debt but people who are at 64,000, they said 98%, 99% always have a credit card, student loan, something there. So on August 29 I looked at this and counted up 2,000 house -- 1% out of our entire metropolitan area. So the issue is pretty big. It isn't a thing that's is saying they're having to drive in from Hutto, where the average price is 240. It is a pretty big issue. I would encourage to us think about not only for sale but for rent. For the aid portion I was on the uli task force that did -- they had a tap panel, and they had some folks in from California who had actually done teacher housing on school land and so we were having this conversation. And they strongly encouraged us from doing for sale housing for teachers on -- at school sites because they did that and couldn't sell it because teachers were saying, yes, I'll do this while I'm teaching but I might be doing something else. So buying it was less desirable than renting at their current structure. So my point simply is, if half of our population is renting today or in the future, if they don't own a home currently, think about rental as a way to provide affordable [4:37:38 PM] housing. It's not homeownership, I understand that and I understand I'll want to where people can and do I some of that myself, but it may not be attainable at all times. That's my point. >> Some of us have to go to campo, four of us. >> At what time? >> Can we let them finish their presentation and then see how much time we have left? >> Just a couple of comments. So as I noted in my opening remarks, the strategy is also for -- is twofold, first time homeowners and those that can rent, because we understand that. The ash discussion we are following up with senator Watson and trying to aggressively see how we can work on that specific issue, but I'll let Rebecca follow up. >> So we talked a little bit about the competition. The focus of the joint subcommittee for those who aren't on the joint subcommittee is tow share information and review progress on identified matters of mutual interest and to explore actions, steps, needed to take positive actions needed for academic success, health, safety, and general well- being of all students. This is a little bit of history, and I'm cognitive of time so I may go a little bit quickly through these slides. But I did want to note that much of the work that we're doing has come to us through the school and family work group. This work group has made recommendations and I've noted the website where you can find their report, which was very helpful in getting some of the conversation to where it is most recently. A little bit of background, recognizing that we could probably even go broader in terms of all of the entities having these conversations and potentially even further back than 2009. But it is important to note some of these larger actions that have been informing and advancing policy that we are continuing to respond to from 2009, 2014, most recently [4:39:40 PM] 2015, the joint subcommittee adopted a goal to explore creating affordable housing on land owned by one of these entities, and I certainly don't disagree nor I don't think anyone would that other entities with quasi-governmental and/or other public entities could easily be considered. As a viable recommendation or option. June 2016, city staff did present an update to the joint subcommittee, and most recently, as of last week, aisd has -- well, October 4, aid issued a public notice of sale, exchange or lease of ten properties in its portfolio. And the joint subcommittee adopt aid resolution requesting that each of the entities represented in the joint subcommittee bring forward policy guidance that will assist in identifying potential properties suitable specifically for housing. Last week, the Austin city council actually advanced further direction, and in that direction Bert Lumbreras, assistant city manager, is heading up a number of subject matter experts. It's an interdepartmental work group and it is formed to respond specifically to the directives by the joint subcommittee and the Austin city council. The city work group actually that is meeting as we're speaking is comprised of experts in economic development, public works, project management, architect, real estate, housing, planning, and finance. The work that's underway by the city of Austin work group is looking at the two separate -- same function but two separate projects. So the aid properties, the objective will be to explore the economic and legal feasibility of a joint [4:41:40 PM] affordable housing project that could include a number of community benefits that is responsive to city of Austin, aisd, and Travis county, along with bringing back the financing strategies. Some of the specific areas of interest are noted on this slide. Second to that, the Austin city council approved a resolution last week and work is underway to look at city of Austin properties that will address affordable housing, mixed-use housing developments, and emergency shelters. The criteria for consideration that the work group will take under advisement is noted on this slide, and it's essentially looking at high-opportunity areas and utilizing key indicators that are available to us through a number of different mapping tools or other identifying key indicators through other tools that exist. Looking at transit attendance Zones, looking at imagine Austin and where imagine Austin is indicating we should be driving density and housing, and then another -- other criterias that will link housing, transit, and jobs. A little bit about the community land trust because we do believe this would be a unique opportunity to administer a clt is what would allow for the homeowner, which is, like Bert had initially said, when you do take out the land, which could be owned by a nonprofit and then exempt from taxes, then you have the opportunity where a homeowner is just paying taxes on the actual improvement. And also their mortgage is on the improvement itself. And so it allows for [4:43:41 PM] opportunities for homeownership that may otherwise not exist for individuals. Next steps is that we will be reporting back to the joint subcommittee and Austin city council. We are working, again, on those two separate tracks with the work group, and we recognize that the deadline for the aid bids offering proposals is December 14. We also are looking at a before end of year report back to the Austin city council on city-owned tracts that could be most viable for a project sooner than later. And that concludes our presentation. >> Yes, I have five points. By the way I learned this as an ADHD person to keep taking notes. Number 1, thank you so much. As always your reports are extremely clear and I appreciate the help of everyone who contributed and shout out to housing works, everything clearly defining, it's wonderful, you should be a teacher. Number 2, how about we ask people what they want instead of realtors determining what they want? Because we've got a bunch of empty condos down here or a bunch of short-term rentals that are degrading our neighborhoods, let's put it that way. They didn't ask people what they wanted. They assumed they knew. Why don't we survey our people and find out what they want. Like you said, and may not want to -- personally I would to the want to live on the campus grounds I teach on. It's a little too dangerous. The kids can find me too fast. I'm just saying that. Let's ask people what they want. Do a survey. Some people want an apartment, some want a house. I think that's much more strategy than saying, oh, yeah you all need this, all of you are gonna be rich and you need this big expensive, you all want to live downtown? No. Do you all want to travel by bicycle? No. I can't carry by groceries. [4:45:42 PM] Number 3 -- I covered that, variety of housing needed. Number 4 on this page here, I'd like to know the names of the people on the city work groups? Who are these experts? >> We're happy to provide that. >> That would be wonderful. I like names. Really helpful. Thank you so much for not using a lot of pronouns. Pronouns like Ora Houston, she doesn't like acronyms, I don't like pronouns. Keep naming them over and over again. It makes them a lot more clearer and be careful about your adjectives. They excite people. And then, oh, why don't we start promoting the idea of getting out this idea of me first. It's about me and my stuff and let's talk about everybody's collective good. I'm not -- yeah I'm a socialist, communist, just call it, I don't care. You can't always be about me, me, me, because you know that's real evil for those of you who are Christians out there. Not a good idea to think about me all the time. The market is not always right, by the way. That goes back to letting people choose and it can't be always about the money and it can't always be about starving and, you know, keeping people out, excluding. It's got to be including, all that good stuff that by the way makes other cities like cope hag enhappy places because the government invests in all that stuff, when the people are happy they go to work happy. When they go to work happy they stay at work. I'm just gonna go on and on but I'll stop. Thank you. >> Thank you all very much. This is excellent work that you're doing. Very excited about it. I think that when we get -- maybe at the next meeting, but I would like to suggest that the -- the second part of what the council passed, I guess it was last week we passed that? >> Yeah. We never remember. >> The second part of the resolution -- >> You ask them? >> The second part of the resolution that we passed was the one that relates to the city identifying land. And I would like to suggest [4:47:43 PM] that we does the other entities that are involved with this group, where it's appropriate to, pass similar resolutions on their bodies. So that we can get to a point where we're all sharing this information about public land that's available. I know, Terry, this is a longer discussion for us at capital metro but I would like to bring to capital metro a request that our staff identify land that could potentially be be used for affordable housing or whatever. And I don't know if the county is in a position to do that or not but that would be interrogatory see if the county could bring a similar resolution. Anyway, I'd like to suggest for all of our bodies that -- that in addition to aisd doing this and the city of Austin doing this, that all of our bodies take that step. >> I'm coming down the road. >> Okay. >> Thank you again for an excellent presentation on the housing plus transit, which is total cost burden. You may be aware of this but CNT has a housing plus transportation index tool. I don't know if that's something you've seen or are using but I find it useful. The aid proposal deadline I understand is December 14. I don't know if this body that we're on is going to meet again before that or if people would want to have any kind of resolution when we have a quorum to weigh in on that. I think it's a very important opportunity for affordable housing and one that I would hope that we don't as a community miss that opportunity is the way that I would put it. I also would like to see us prioritize again this issue of available land, looking at all of the entities. And, again, thank you for your presentation. [4:49:48 PM] >> Bridget. >> The subcommittee of the joint subcommittee, affordable housing subcommittee, I'm on that, and trustee Paul Saldana is on it and councilmember tovo is on it, and we are meeting monthly now in advance of this December deadline for aid. So normally we meet quarterly but our subcommittee is meeting monthly on this affordable housing issue in particular. And the county does have a plan to deal with a resolution which came out of the joint subcommittee on this affordable housing initiative on our -- not the agenda for tomorrow but on next week's Tuesday agenda, and I'll pass along your request that we all -- we support that. >> Actually, my request is broader than that, because the resolution that we ended up passing at the city was broader than what came out of the subcommittee. Because it also had the component of asking aid to identify all of our land. So if it's appropriate, the second part of the ask for Travis county, in addition to supporting the work that came out of the joint subcommittee, second part of that ask would be for Travis county to identify all available land. >> We are actually in the process of doing that. We actually -- >> You are, okay. >> We committed to doing that last year. >> Okay. >> And we have in fact passed a resolution, I guess, committing ourselves to look for every opportunity to reuse county land for affordable housing, and we're in the process right now of negotiating with an applicant for the reuse of land along airport boulevard adjacent to our existing county offices that would provide 154 units of deeply affordable housing on airport boulevard. So we're also in discussions with capital metro to try and increase the places of access [4:51:48 PM] for transit and rail as well. And the other thing I wanted to say, in the initial discussions around the joint subcommittee we looked at the school district putting up the land, the city bringing the sort of skill and resources potentially around the affordable housing construction to the table, and the county also has programs in particular that can help people with down payment assistance. Because that's one of the questions about if families commit to affordable housing, they forgo the ability to capture the increased appraised value of the home over time. And so our thought was that part of what could go with that is assistance from the county on helping people with down payment assistance and essentially savings funds, matching funds, wharf whatever it would look like that could make up for that loss of appreciation of the value of people's homes if they choose to live in affordable housing. So we're looking at a lot of different possibilities. >> Thank you, guys. You do great work all the time. >> Would it be -- I don't know if it would be useful to other members of the committee, but I've been thinking, it would be interesting to me to see a map of -- you know, at some point, a map of the available public land in our -- in our area so we could see, well, here's the city piece, here's the county piece, here's aid, here's the other entities. It would help me understand what our potential is across our community. I mean, does that sound reasonable or interesting? >> I think -- >> Yes, I concur. What I've been envisioning is a database, for lack of a better term, but -- that shows, as I say, the usable available land, not a little piece but something that's meaningful affordable housing. So have that data collected from all the entities [4:53:49 PM] that&then we can map it. >> I'm wonderer if can can help with that. They've got data up the wazoo. >> They don't have this. >> Public land. We did -- actually, the joint subcommittee did compile or ask staff to compile a master list of all property from the three entities. But it did include a lot of easements. So you have a lot of -- a lot of listings, but it seems to me that -- I don't know if it's a searchable database, but you ought to be able to select from it, you know, properties above a certain size, which would drop out all the easements into tiny scraps. >> Yeah, the useful stuff and map it, yeah. >> I guess that's a resource issue. You know? Maybe we can speak -- maybe we can talk about how that might be done. >> Yeah. One of the things that I think we're wanting to get to there. I think we have a current list, like, for example,, on the city's surplus property but then we also have properties that have been in the works for certain projects that maybe -- that we're actually looking at trying to combine it all. I think we're still working through that list. I do agree that would be extremely helpful and we'll be happy to get there. I'm just not sure we're there yet. >> I'd love to have us look at -- and this would ultimately be a school district issue, but there's a lot of available land at school district sites that do potentially be used for multi-family teacherrages which the law would be allowed to be restricted for teachers that would be adjacent to the school. You may not want to live that close to a school where you teach but for others it may be an advantage to eliminating a commute and having the school adjacent to where their children would attend, et cetera, et cetera. So that wouldn't show up on any maps of excess land, because it's already a school site, but there is additional available land at the school sites that I would love to see [4:55:50 PM] be considered for this kind of thing. >> It really gets back to that available useful land. It may not be excess, but it could be available and useful as opposed to land that's excesses that a median that is not useful. >> Chair, back in the spring, just to add to this, I agree with what Bert has said about there's a -- putting it together. There was the office of real estate services for the city did put out there on I think a jis viewer in -- coming back from a prior resolution, not specifically about this but related to it where we did put out a gisy view of some of our land and tried to get at some fact about stripping out the easements, the ones we don't look at so we can recirculate that. I think it was released if my memory serves me in March. So we can get that back out, again, as a starting point. I don't think it captures everything that's been discussed here but kind of just piggybacking on what Bert said, I think we can add to that some of those other elements that he discussed. >> Okay. And that's something that -- I mean, that whole subject is on our strategic plan so we can have a more robust conversation at a future meeting and on that note, the items that I was thinking for future agenda items, please let me know if you have any. So the next meeting is, I believe, November 28. So I'm wondering if folks, it's the Tuesday after Thanksgiving. So do y'all think -- >> If it's on a Tuesday we'll have a commissioners court meeting. Can't attend on a Tuesday. >> Is it the -- my phone is -- >> Monday. >> My phone has 1%. >> The 28th is a Monday after Thanksgiving. >> Okay. I'm sorry, it's the Monday. And I'm just wondering if we should keep that on the calendar or if people reason out of town. >> I'll be in town. I don't have enough money to travel outside of town. >> I do all the cooking. I'll be here. >> I'll be ready for [4:57:50 PM] hamburgers. >> But it would be good if we could have a quorum. >> That being said it's my understanding, but I'm gonna look at the bylaws, that I as the chair can just take folks off who haven't been for three meetings. So without -- I need to look at the bylaws but if that's the case, it will be easier for us to get quorum. >> Yes. >> Aisd has a whole week off now because we finally conformed to everybody else doing a whole week off so I think parents will be ready to go back to work, everybody ready to put their kids back in school and get back to work Monday. >> Okay. Ann? >> At the last meeting we talked about another item to put on the agenda this time and it -- >> What was it? >> Maybe it makes sense to have it next time. >> What was that? >> That had to do with the issue of the school bus radius, and that -- that's in our strategic plan. >> The district boundaries, the zoning. The 2- mile walking versus having a bus. >> It's page 9. >> Okay. >> It was under outcome three, strategies, familiarizing members with the [off mic] The criteria behind the policy [indiscernible] >> And it occurs to me some it might be good because it was mentioned today and we know it's moving ahead the codenext, some sort of update, briefing could be timely, I think. >> Okay. Did our staff get all of that? Thanks. Did you have something? >> Going back to the discussion of members, are we gonna try to see if Leander wants to send somebody else or -- >> I think that -- I think I can officially take the people -- the people who have missed three off. Which I think would be commissioner long and Hisle [4:59:52 PM] and possibly Mr. Kaplan as well because I know they're not coming back. I know Ellen is coming back, obviously. And so I believe the seat stays vacant for those entities to be able to fill them if they choose to but it doesn't count towards our quorum. >> Okay. That's good. >> Yeah. >> [Off mic] [Off milk]. >> I would say an update on timeline and the specifics of codenext relating to affordability and that intersect with our mission and our strategic plan. >> That might be the entire thing. >> Well, but the housing. >> Yeah. I think we need to -- we'll need to narrow it down for them. So I would say the affordable housing, the relationship between codenext and the joint code review, which is what occurs between the city and the county. And I would say those two. And maybe there's an affordability prescription paper. >> Right. >> So there may be some other key issues in that. But I would keep it to that. Otherwise it will be -- >> Right. Yes. I agree on the code and I was thinking about the affordable housing specifically and the affordability prescription. And there may be some portion of the transportation that they want to loop into that, but it's not occurring to me. I think really the affordable housing and the code prescription -- the affordability paper. >> We could do the transportation. >> That works for me. >>