Council Liveblog: Affordable Housing, RDA $$$

Happy days, the calendar AND the weather both agree that Spring 2011 is finally here.  If not for a City Council meeting tonight, I would most likely be found lolling around on some green grass trying to soak up every last available ray of sunshine… so, you feel free to do that and check in on me every once in a while via this little ol’ liveblog from Community Chambers.

Tonight’s agenda is jam-packed.  First up is a long-requested informational item on our Affordable Housing program… what’s working, what’s not, what exactly do we have in place and have we learned from experience?  Then, more big items regarding Redevelopment Agency monies… a couple of projects are proposed, but is that all of them?  Lastly, a budget update… look for some increasingly serious positions from Councilmembers on how we should trim our expenditures and increase revenues.

As always, find the staff reports for agenda items in all of their easy clickable glory below.  Got something to contribute or ask?  Go ahead and make YOUR voice heard in the Comments section below.

I’ll start live coverage at or about 6:30pm, so come on back then for your regular updates.

Agenda (pdf)

Consent Calendar

• 01 Sikh Day 2011.pdf
• 02B Long Range Calendar.pdf
• 04A Amtrak Lease Extension.pdf
• 04B Support of Measure A.pdf
• 04C-1 City-UCD SLC Minutes 02-09-11.pdf
• 04C-2 FBC Minutes 02-14-11.pdf
• 04C-3 HRMC Minutes 01-24 & 02-28-11.pdf
• 04C-4 PC Minutes 07-28-10.pdf
• 04C-5 SSC Minutes 11-15-10 & 02-28 & 03-02-2011.pdf
• 04C-6 Telecom Minutes 12-01-10.pdf
• 04C-7 WDCWA Minutes 12-01, 12-14-10 & 01-13-11.pdf
• 04D RPC Minutes 01-20-11.pdf
• 04E City Manager Recruitment Updated Timeline.pdf

Regular Calendar

• 05 Affordable Housing Workshop Part 3.pdf
• 06 Hotel Conference Center.pdf
• 07 Wiseman Company G Street ENA.pdf
• 08 Innovation Hub RFI.pdf
• 09 Budget Update.pdf
• 10 Council Liaison Appointments.pdf

6:30pm – It’s 6:30pm and I’m ready to go… since not everyone else is, how about a little show and tell?  In honor of Sikh Day 2011, here is a picture of me participating in my good friends’ traditional Sikh marriage ceremony.

6:36pm – Ok, the Mayor is seated and ready to get this meeting started… there’s the gavel.

6:38pm – We have an agenda, 5-0.  And now, it’s time for the proclamation: 01 Sikh Day 2011.pdf

From the Proclamation, April 13th will be “We Are All Sikhs Day”.

WHEREAS, Sikhs, who have a distinct religious and ethnic identity, respect other religions and believe in equality of all humans; and
WHEREAS, Sikh immigrants have resided in, and contributed to, California for more than a century, with the first Sikh immigrants believed to have labored on railroad construction projects, in lumber mills, and in the agricultural heartlands of the Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Imperial Valleys;

6:44pm – Long Range Calendar, Item 2B.  Interim City Manager Paul Navazio notes that this is a fluid planning document… but that the Council is scheduled to meet for 3 weeks in a row. May 17th is the target date to present the proposed budget for FY2011.

6:53pm – Public Comments is now open for items not on the agenda.

Alan Pryor, as per usual, is here to comment… but not about woodburning fireplaces.  He first of all echoes the community solidarity behind our Sikh brothers and sisters.  Next up, he reports out on when Council should expect a plastic bag ban.  And now, he’s asking the City to adopt a “Zero Waste Event” for the community Fourth of July event… and he wants the City to hire Michael Siminitus of Waste Busters.  Agreed, hire them to get a plan in place to decrease waste at our community events.

Richard Harris, President of the DJUSD School Board, is here to thank the Council for their support of Measure A.  Look for ballots in your mailbox soon, and mail them back quickly!

Roger Bockrath is here to ask the Council to rethink how our recyclables are processed… and to do a better job of encouraging “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle” and a way of life.  Downcycling (status quo) vs. upcycling… he’s asking that people who steal scrap metal from DWR be prosecuted.

Peter Ragnor (sp?) is a local teacher who is the wonderful guy who maintains the Central Park Merry Go Round aka The Flying Carousel of The Delta Breeze with materials from DWR… another proponent of upcycling who would like the City to support their community efforts.

A young woman from the Davis Bike Collective is here in support of upcycling as well… they often get more bikes than they can handle and would like to continue using DWR for their upcycling.  Darren, another Bike Collective member, would also like the Council to ask DWR to allow these upcycling scavengers to continue upcycling metals at that site.  Larry, another citizen is now speaking in favor of upcycling at DWR because it allows folks to repurpose and reuse items… Metal Recovery Bin (MRB) is what we’re talking about here.  He’s just presented the Council with a repurposed shovel and a leaf-blower alternative to show just a few of the many examples of “viable products” items that can be repurposed and reused from the MRB.

7:15pm – Consent Calendar: Items 4B & 4E have been removed by Swanson.  The rest of the Consent Calendar passes 5-0.

Item 4B, Support of Measure A, is now being heard.  Motion passes 5-0 to support Measure A.

Item 4E,  04E City Manager Recruitment Updated Timeline.pdf , the consultant Heather Renschler of Ralph Andrson & Associates, is here.  The recrutiment brochure is out and recruitment has begun. Heather reports that they have had a lot of positive feedback and an “appropriate amount of response”.  The closing date is April 29th and she is now suggesting that Council meet immediately afterward in Closed Session. First round of interviews will be late May, then second round in mid June.

Community members should take the opportunity to give feedback in this short survey.

Greenwald is suggesting specific protocols for how the new City Manager is chosen… she’d like “discretionary private conversations” with candidates.  Krovoza suggests a May 5th meeting with a “tight agenda” to determine these protocols and would like the consultant to come back with that series of choices.  Souza supports the notion of every Councilmember reviewing every application. The item as proposed passed 5-0.

7:36pm – 05 Affordable Housing Workshop Part 3.pdf

Danielle Foster is presenting for City Staff.  From the staff report (yikes, 71 pages!),

This report will continue the discussion of local housing needs, available tools within affordable housing (both projects and programs), and will allow for a discussion of Council and community goals for the Davis Affordable Housing Program. Staff will then take this information and return with a subsequent recommendation for the City Council/Agency Board to consider at a subsequent meeting.

7:48pm – Bill Streng is here to speak on behalf of developers who have built inclusionary affordable housing without City subsidies.  Mr. Streng comments that the report, although long, is very thorough.  Streng thinks that it would be beneficial for the City to determine how many non-student residents have unaffordable housing. An important principle Mr. Streng would like for the City to commit to is getting the most units for the least amount of money.  The City should also consult with existing apartment owners before making any big decisions about new affordable student housing.  Mr. Streng thinks that with West Village coming online next year, we’ll see a lot of local apartment owners willing to create some Section 8 housing.

For down-payment or loan assistance, Mr. Streng thinks that the City need to think like bankers and ensure that the money gets recycled with the City sharing in immediate profits not after the first 5%.

7:58pm – Dave Taormino is now speaking about for-sale homes.  Basically, he argues that we live in a non-inflationary situation because of the unlimited supply in Woodland, Dixon and West Sacramento.  Mr. Taormino does not believe that the market will be able to absorb the for-sale affordable homes that come for sale in the near future.

Historically speaking, the average difference between homes in Davis and Woodland has been about 25%… that differentiation is now about 55%.  So, younger people looking for a good investment are more likely to buy in Woodland.  Thus, Mr. Taormino thinks we need to rethink City sponsored affordable for-sale ordinances to offer more flexibility to suit our economically challenged times.

8:05pm – Jason Taormino is now speaking about for-sale assistance, but takes a moment to remind us that there are families in this town that need monthly rental assistance and emergency shelter.

Jason has been creating a community-driven down payment assistance program … and he believes that there are many market-rate homes for sale now that would be a perfect fit for such a program.

Mark Rutheiser is now commenting on infill projects that were subject to the inclusionary housing ordinance.  Rutheiser is speaking about the tools he used to meet those requirements: dedication to a housing co-operative, in-lieu fees and the recent dedication of the B Street (Central Park West) Homes and some financial assistance to the J Street Co-op.

8:11pm – Next up, developers who have received City Assistance.  Mary Philip, Board Member of Yolo Habitat Humanity, is here to speak for that organization, “demand for our homes far outweighs our ability to supply them.”  Common themes for success include: new build lots are supplied at no cost, cities provide assistance with grants and supportive neighbors.

Sacramento/Yolo County Mutual Housing Association is now speaking about their model for providing low cost housing.

David Thompson, of Neighborhood Partners, is now presenting information about affordable housing in the form of co-operatives… he believes that the RDA Affordable Housing fund needs to be treated with a more business like attitude.  David believes that Dos Pinos is the most successful affordable housing program that the City has ever financed… it’s a limited equity co-operative.  David proposes that the City, as Stephen Souza has suggested, investigate the purchase of existing apartment complexes.  He supports the down payment program that the real estate community is creating.

8:30pm – Janice Holt from Yolo County Housing is now speaking about their options for ensuring affordable housing in the community which includes several federal, state and private grants.  Their waitlist will be open on May 16th for the first time in 3 years… a majority of their residents are the working poor, elderly folks and people with disabilities.

Luke Watkins, also of Neighborhood Partners, believes that land dedication is the most effective tool that Council has in their “toolbox”.

Shelley Dukirk, a mortgage specialist from USE Credit Union is now talking about their financing products for affordable housing… they are open to anyone who lives, works or worships in Davis.

Emily Ford from NeighborWorks is here to talk about their services to buyers, developers and municipalities that help assist people and communities with the path to home ownership and long-term financial success.

8:44pm – Public Comment is now open.  Nancy Conk is speaking as an advocate for affordable housing development and echoes the idea that the land preservation component is one of the city’s best tools.  Mary Philip is now speaking on behalf of the Interfaith Rotating Winter Shelter and she believes that there is a need for some sort of transitional housing for transients and other homeless in our community.

Council questions will now occur.  Councilmember Souza is up first.

Souza is asking about rehabilitation projects… Staff answers that only Sojourner Truth and Rosa Parks and one other smaller project are the only times that we’ve done rehab.

Souza also clarifies that the staff number or 700 owner homes isn’t quite accurate… only about 500 of those have owner occupancy or re-sale requirements.

He’s now asking for clarity on how many affordable units are in the pipeline… apparently there are about 70-90.

When was the last land dedication? About 2002, because they only come from larger subdivision developments.

Councilmember Swanson is now up… First question has to do with the role of in-lieu fees as related to infill projects… they are currently allowed in the core for 18 units or less… Council could change those number to a density threshold.

Swanson wants to know where we’re at with a public/private partnership regarding the down payment assistance program… it’s on hold now waiting on RDA discussions.

Councilmember Greenwald is clarifying where Davis lands on the amount of affordable housing that we require/produce… apparently, we are in the highest range for the State of California.  Greenwald is concerned about the “do-ability” of infill sites with existing affordable housing requirements… what would be required of developers?  Staff answer: if it’s all ownerhsip and with a density bonus, it would land about 20-22%.

Councilmember Wolk is concerned about per unit cost to the City… has staff tried to calculate City cost for each options?  Answer: yes, based on income levels, but sometimes it’s difficult to judge.  Wolk is now asking about previous down-payment assistance programs and how successful they were… Answer is that most of those were a silent second loan from developer subsidies, but not really a rotating program… although they did try the CalHome program but the bridge financing was too great.

Now, Councilmember Comments are open and the Mayor is reminding us all that staff has asked for some direction on measured outcomes:

1. Unit production
2. Increase in income diversity within city resident households
3. Increase in local residency of the local workforce, reduction in commuters
4. Increase in housing affordability (rents and/or prices)
5. Decrease in local count of families and individuals who are homeless

9:05 pm – Councilmember Greenwald thinks that the problem we’re facing is that we don’t have an accurate figure on what a typical housing figure has to be priced at to gain the necessary revenues to finance our city services and unfunded liabilities… it’s probably somewhere between $500k-600k… an inconvenient fact for affordable housing, indeed.  She thinks that we’re in a bind… “we can’t be all things to all people”… it’s a reality that affordable houses don’t pay for city services.  She also believes that we need to rethink our affordable requirements for high-density infill sites… because of the different economics of redevelopment.

9:13pm – Councilmember Wolk echoes the concerns of Mary Philips and Jason Taormino about the needs of at-risk and homeless people.  He thinks that we need to commit to the bold goal of ending homelessness within this decade.  Work-force housing should also be a priority goal.

Councilmember Swanson applauds Staff and the community members for presenting tonight because it was a “true workshop”… agreed.  She believes that we need to be cognizant, like Greenwald mentioned, of the unintended consequences of our policies.  “In order for us to move forward and pay our bills, how do we leverage our assets… What is the best return on our investments?”  She would like to see some concrete language from staff on the down payment assistance program and some solutions for people who are locked into the Davis Model Lease (who might miss out on Yolo County’s May 16th opening of their waitlist.)  Also, what are the most innovative uses for future land dedication.

9:20pm - Councilmember Souza had six different proposals last year, one of them is the down-payment assistance program and he’d like for us to move forward aggressively with that program.  “We need to be incredibly frugal with all of our dwindling resources.”

“We need to clear one of the biggest impediments to free-market affordable housing… impact fees based on units rather than square footage that ultimately discourages construction of small units.”

“We need to look at spending our money on rehabilitating for-sale apartment complexes… it’s a tool that needs to be in our box.”

Lastly, Souza thinks that tenant-based assistance programs need to be researched.

9:25pm – The Mayor has a few closing comments, he’s interested in models that are efficient financially and create communities in contexts like co-operatives and mutual housing… which dovetails nicely with workforce housing.  He’d also like further staff analysis of existing types of housing (Green Terrace vs. Dos Pinos), which models are best for the future?  Krovoza agrees with Souza about possibly buying and rehabilitating existing stock for affordable purposes.  He also thinks that a key component to the down-payment assistance program is the ability to recycle that money quickly.

Kudos all around to everybody who participated and the depth of information given.

9:29pm – The Mayor is instituting a new policy, 10 minute breaks will be actually 10 minutes… he’s even asked the AV staff to dim and raise the lights like at intermission of a performance!

9:39pm – The gavel has sounded and the Mayor has called the meeting back to order.  Good job Mr. Mayor, thanks for keeping us in line!

06 Hotel Conference Center.pdf is next up.  From the staff report,

The City Council Goals 2010-2012 contains the action to “Present options to the City Council for the development of a hotel/conference center facility within or adjacent to the downtown.” A downtown hotel conference center would provide both fiscal and non-monetary benefits to the community. It would also better position the downtown in response to the proposed expansion of the Hyatt Place hotel on the UC Davis campus. During the latest actions on the Redevelopment Agency’s response to the Governor’s budget proposal, the Agency Board identified the hotel / conference center as one of its highest priority economic development objectives.

Staff has worked with owners of both University Park Inn and Hallmark Inn for the past year to identify options for consideration.  The Hallmark Inn has withdrawn their proposal for a conference center… so, Councilmember Swanson will not have to leave the room due to conflict of interest.

The University Park Inn on Richards Boulevard at Olive Drive currently has 45 rooms and 25 suites, a small meeting room, and a swimming pool. The hotel property also houses the Café Italia restaurant. The proposal includes the construction of a conference facility as part of a new 85 room, 6 story full service/4-star hotel. The hotel would include a rooftop restaurant and new underground parking garage. The existing 25 unit hotel building on the north side of the property would remain and be converted to a boutique extended stay hotel. The final project would consist of the following: 65 net new rooms, 10,000 square feet of conference center.

Total estimated project cost is $15.5 million with a $5million loan from the RDA at 6% for 20 years.

A major obstacle to this project is connectivity to the downtown.

9:53pm – The Mayor is trying something else new tonight which is having Public Comment immediately after the Staff presentation… and then combine Council Questions & Comments.  Ashok Patel, project owner, is here to thank Staff and Council.  Shar Katz, owner of Caffe Italia, is here to talk about how their business will be affected.

Councilmember Swanson: How much will be left in RDA funds if this project is approved?  Answer: There would be about $16million remaining to be spent.

Construction could be as early as Spring 2012 if the entitlement process happened quickly.

Councilmember Greenwald wants to know if this hotel would create a critical mass for an airport shuttle… Staff has not had that level of detailed conversation.  Greenwald also clarifies that the property tax generated would be about $100k after pass-thru to other jurisdictions.  She thinks that it is the best location in town for such a project… it’s a “transformative moment in Davis” if we approve the project.

Councilmember Wolk has questions about Caffe Italia and any adverse impacts on them.  Staff does not know yet if they would be eligible for mitigation assistance.  Wolk is also concerned about traffic mitigation on Richards Boulevard.

AUDIENCE UPDATE: There are 10 people in the room besides staff, all of them representatives of the business and development community.

Councilmember Souza would like to know who would bear the costs of any transportation upgrades that will be needed due to the project. Answer: the RDA would fund the CEQA analysis and some portion of the commercial rehabilitation loan would address who pays those costs.  Souza is also getting on the record about helping fund a move for Caffe Italia even if there is no legal requirement.

Mayor Krovoza comments that we need an acute focus on connectivity… “once someone parks their car at this facility, they shouldn’t even think about getting in their car to enjoy Downtown Davis… and also get connected to Amtrak… We also need to be very aware that this project will be at our very front door and we need to ensure that it sends the right message about our dedication to a modern and sustainable building.”  Also, he’s concerned that maybe it’s not enough conference center space.

Souza has a final comment about the necessity to obligate RDA money… and that we need to be sensitive about all of the projects that are out in the community.  Souza moves, Direct staff to proceed with negotiations for a financing package and return on April 19th for approval of final Commercial Rehabilitation Loan documents for the project.  Seconded by Greenwald.  It passes 5-0.

Souza moves that Staff work with Caffe Italia on relocation and provide City or RDA with appropriate assistance as necessary and the actions be brought back to Council, Greenwald seconds.  Krovoza has concerns about the legal ramifications of this motion.

Swanson has a substitute motion that Staff bring back alternatives as appropriate after working the current owners of Caffe Italia and University Park Inn, Krovoza seconds.  This motion passes 5-0.

10:32pm – Next up is 07 Wiseman Company G Street ENA.pdf .  Due to Councilmember Swanson’s financial interest in a new restaurant downtown, she has recused herself from this decision.  From the staff report,

The Wiseman Company has identified the north end of the block bounded by G Street, 3rd Street and H Street as the most feasible location for redevelopment. This site includes the City parking lot, two parcels occupied by Davis Ace and Ket-Mo-Ree restaurant, and the parcel occupied by the G Street Pub and Katmandu Restaurant. Wiseman is proposing high-quality ground floor retail and 2-3 floors of Class A professional offices. Parking would be integrated into the overall project but likely built by the city on the easterly portion of the project site with access off of H Street.

Wiseman is requesting an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with the City of Davis as it evaluates financial feasibility and proceeds to negotiate with the property owners (including the City). Wiseman has stated that the company will expend considerable time and money for architectural, engineering and other professional services during the negotiation period. They would like to have the assurance that their investments are protected during the negotiation
phase. The other property owners are supportive of exploring a potential redevelopment project, and of the city negotiating exclusively with the Wiseman Company.

No project is being approved now nor is anybody obligated to agree to anything.  Scot Hunter is the Infill Division’s Managing Partner and CEO and here to answer questions.  Public Comment is now open and closed to lack of interest.

10:40pm – Greenwald wants to know about the net increase of parking and the future of Davis ACE Hardware.  There probably would be a net increase in parking, but it’s too early to say how many.  ACE Hardware is interested in pursuing these conversations and could possibly integrate into a new building or perhaps on an adjoining site.  Greenwald thinks this project will distract staff from getting a downtown parking lot obligated by July 1st.  Ken Hiatt answers that very little staff time will be dedicated to this and that the parking lot structure at 3rd, 4th, E & F will still be pursued.

Wolk wants to know if other developers have expressed interest in that site… The Wiseman Company is the only development group to come forward with an unsolicited offer… the answer is no.  Wolk also wants to know how much assistance the RDA may be asked to contribute… too early to tell, but anywhere from $500k to $11million.

Shorter milestones for good faith progress are built into this agreement, and if they are not met then the City can terminate the Agreement.

Krovoza seems generally supportive but wants to ensure that all opportunities for parking downtown are fully explored.  Souza thinks that we may be limiting ourselves to other opportunities by entering into exclusive negotiations… and seems supportive of an RFP process.

Krovoza moves the staff recommendation to approve the exclusive negotiating agreement, Wolk seconds with a friendly amendment to require the Wiseman Company to come back if they want a 90 day extension.  Motion passes 4-0.

11:03pm – Five minute break!

11:09pm – And we’re back. 08 Innovation Hub RFI.pdf From the staff report,

During the past month, staff has been working to refine the City’s response to the Concepts Request. We have been consulting with representatives from Yolo County, the Chamber of Commerce, the DSIDE Steering Committee, DDBA representatives, SARTA, SACTO, and members of the technology/business community on possible options. One question we have been working to answer is how broad the scope of the proposal should be – should we provide a regional response, one centered on Davis only, or something in between? Staff’s desire has been to provide a response that is sufficiently visionary to be attractive to the Chancellor, yet practical enough to be implemented within in a reasonable timeframe.

Ken Hiatt is now explaining the draft document itself.

11:19pm – Public Comment is now Open and Closed.  Also, the Mayor has announced that we’ve postponed the Budget Update until May 5th.

Audience Update – There are three people in the audience: M. Bisch, M. Rutheiser & S. Boschken.

Councilmember Swanson is reporting about the huge number of people and groups that have come forward to work with the City on Business & Economic Development… and that we’re going to do this stuff with or without an official UC Davis stamp…

Souza is supportive of this “first step in a long journey”.  Greenwald doesn’t expect revenue from these efforts and thinks that we need I-80 access to Nishii from UC Davis.  Wolk likes the wide scope of the proposal. Krovoza would like some clarification about the term “iHub” in Downtown.  Staff says that they are still trying to develop that nomenclature and the structures and business plans etc etc.

Souza moves the document and authorizes Staff to further refine and submit, Swanson seconds.  Motion passes 5-0.

11:32pm - Last up is 10 Council Liaison Appointments.pdf .

Audience Update - and it’s empty.

Greenwald moves to appoint herself to the Clean Water Agency, Wolk seconds for discussion.  She thinks she is best suited to save the City money in this process… and she wants more “key inter-jurisdictional bodies.”  Swanson wants an update from Krovoza & Souza about where they are in the process…

Krovoza says that they’ll be meeting quarterly… currently deciding on specific water quality levels… lots of delicate decisions now…

Swanson feels OK with the current assignments and that we need to retain the collegiality that is in place.

Swanson has made a point of order during Greenwald’s comments… she thinks that finances are important, but that Greenwald’s comments were getting too personal… Greenwald is talking again about her needed experience on the CWA Board.  Wolk compliments Souza & Krovoza on their work on the JPA and hopes that they will make a conscience effort to come back to the Council with any big decisions.

Krovoza calls the question, it fails 1-4.  Greenwald makes another motion, to appoint herself (rather than Wolk) to the City Attorney evaluations subcommittee and to keep, rather than abolish, the City Manager hiring subcommittee, Souza seconds.  Krovoza feels like their work on the City Manager subcommittee is done but work on the City Attorney subcommittee is NOT done…

By consent, they agree to terminate both the City Manager and City Attorney hiring/review subcommittees AND Greenwald withdraws her motion.  Swanson moves the package, Souza seconds.  Motion passes 4-1, with Greenwald dissenting.

11:55pm – Meeting is in recess and stands adjourned.