Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Work Session   11/12/2026

Does Sam use toothpicks or something?

Don't get me started.

Thank you.

It's really gross.

Is there a trash can?

Yeah, good.

I really did leave my phone.

I feel naked without it.

I know Gillet's on the way.

Yeah, I know she's on the way.

Oh, she did text me three minutes late.

You made it.

I didn't see your text.

All right, we're ready.

Let's call this meeting to order.

All right, we'll take a moment of silence.

Okay, I don't see anyone to give public comment or PHAR comments, but anybody have any comments?

Okay, first up is resolution number 1511 to retain John Sales as executive director

of CRHA.

So this is resolution approving the continued service of John M. Sales as Executive Director of Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority.

whereas John M. Sales has served as Executive Director of the CRHA since August 3rd, 2020 and whereas the Board of Commissioners of CRHA recognizes the scope and complexity of the Executive Director position, the importance of leadership continuity and the experience, expertise and knowledge that Mr.

Sales brings to CRHA and whereas the Board would like to invite Mr.

Sales to continue serving as Executive Director of CRHA under a renewed leadership framework

and whereas the board and Mr.

Sales wish to commit to participate in board and executive director training and to establish parameters around the board's involvement in CRHA's operations and the role and authority of the executive director and whereas the board and Mr.

Sales also wish to establish a shared

set of priorities for CRHA which will include preserving and expanding affordable housing opportunities, strengthening resident engagement and CRHA's resident focus, improving communications within and outside CRHA, building leadership capacity, improving CRHA's financial stability, fostering a healthy and collaborative organizational culture, and developing a strategic vision for CRHA that prioritizes residents and CRHA's mission.

and whereas the board wants to provide Mr.

Sales with a retention bonus in the amount of $20,000 contingent upon a one year commitment or 35 years as part of a renewed employment agreement between Mr.

Sales and CRHA.

So now, therefore, be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners of the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority that the continued service of Mr.

Motion to approve.

Commissioner Walz?

Just a few quick questions about process.

For his contract, his current contract expires in 2030, I believe.

So we will be, yes, negotiating some terms of that contract.

And that was just the other question, whether it will come back to the board for a vote.

And I presume with that, we'll go through review just to make sure everything is correct.

That's the only question I had on process.

And again, some of the last time, I don't think the retention bonus is

what I would consider for any organization a best practice but I respect that the board has arrived at this and the majority is there.

OK.

So I think we got a motion.

Did we get a second?

OK. Can you do it?

Commissioner Moss?

Yes.

Commissioner Hicks?

Yes.

Commissioner Rosenblith?

Yes.

Commissioner O'Rourke?

Yes.

Abstention.

All right.

Okay, next up we are going to discuss CCDC.

I will start by giving the history of CCDC and then John and Delphine will add some context.

So the Charlottesville Community Development Corporation, we've gotten questions from council and Commissioner Payne about this.

So CCDC was formed in March of 2019.

Grant Duffield was the executive director at that time.

Delphine was not consulted on the formation of the entity and our understanding is that Ashley Davies of Riverbend Development discussed the entity with Mr. Duffield and then the law firm of Williams Mullen was assisted in the creation of the entity.

CCDC is used for LIHTC transactions.

It serves as a funding intermediary to transfer funds to the LIHTC partnership in the form of loans documented by promissory notes.

CCDC doesn't actually have any cash on hand and does not use its own funds to make these loans.

This is a standard for LIHTC transactions.

The loans typically don't carry any interest

and John Williams.

I want to thank you all for being here today.

Phase 1, CCDC made two loans to the project in the amount of $1,125,000 and $2.5 million, respectfully.

For South First Street, Phase 2, CCDC made two loans to the project in the amount of $4 million and $6 million.

For Crescent Hall, CCDC made two loans to the project in the amount of

$1,875,000 and $6.4 million.

And then for Sixth Street, CCDC made two loans to the project in the amount of $3 million and $4 million.

Participation of CCDC and LIHTC transaction has been discussed with the Board of Commissioners of CRHA and is included in multiple CRHA resolutions.

The audited financial statements of CRHA discuss CCDC.

We have examples of that in the audit for fiscal year ending 3-31-25 on pages 26 and 27.

You did a great job.

A few questions.

They don't have financial statements.

The money comes in and goes out.

So the money that is expended is actually shown on the tax credit audits, which each entity is audited that receives the funds.

So the housing authority that receives the funds initially passes them to the CCDC, which then passes them to the entity.

So nothing is ever charged to the actual CCDC.

Everything just flows through it.

If it does, in which it has received some, it has all flowed back through the Housing Authority.

The CCD setting has no expenses.

It has no employees, has no expenses, and so everything flows through it.

The CCDC earned it, but then it was passed through the CRJ because CRJ is actually an entity that controls

In our budgets, because over time, I think to date there's several million dollars in LIHTC developer fees and over time it's going to be eight plus million, which is normal.

I mean any developer would have that happen.

So if you pull the actual entities

audit you will see that a majority almost like 75 to 80 percent of the developer fee is all loan back because none of the developments can actually happen without the CRHA saying hey we're not going to collect the fee and so if you look at Crescent Halls alone it was supposed to be a million dollar developer fee well 800,000 was lent back that will

And I think if you remember, we had a conversation probably about a year, year and a half ago about some funds that CRHA had to cover for the city around the

was the sustainability plan.

We had hired some staff and the city was supposed to cover those staff funding positions for redevelopment.

Well, it didn't happen.

And I told you that we had to use our own funds to do it.

Well, those are the funds that get used for activities like that.

And then have we received LIHTC developer fees for 6th Street and South 1st Street too yet?

Well, developer fees aren't received until after development is brought online and then development actually has to break even.

And so there are processes for that to happen.

No, and I can almost guarantee you a majority of that developer fee will also go back because none of the projects actually break even by themselves without the developer fee coming back into the project.

Like right now, South First Street is looking at I think a million dollar shortfall getting that project completed.

Right, and I think

Again, some of these are questions coming from Council as a whole as well as myself.

Obviously, there's an upcoming request for City Council for over $8 million for some property acquisitions.

As part of that, Council has been wanting to review

just the total financial situation, because Council's also considering other affordable housing investments, because that would be all of our existing surplus.

Looking at the CRHA audit is the best way of looking at that.

It shows the CCD site, CCDC loans that are lent out to each entity.

I think the breakdown, if you look in the package, it's one of the last pages.

shows a table of all the CCBC notes and it even shows like if it was a city bond loan that produced it or if it was AHOF which is the Affordable Housing Group and they provided it.

The only ones that aren't shown yet are the ones that Delphine identified for phase two of South First Street and Sixth Street phase one because those projects, the loans actually haven't hit the books, they haven't closed yet.

But if you look at the audit, shows a clear breakdown of

Right and I know council has seen the Crescent Hall, South First Street One audits and the city audit is provided to the city every year during the grant process

Right.

I think one of the questions there's been is in some of those as well as CRHA's audits themselves, CCDC gets referenced and there are some sources of like $2 million, but it's just hard to track exactly.

It is blended into the overall CRHA budget.

if that question was asked I would have brought some information around that but if you look in the CCDC audits, I mean TCDs, if you look in each entity audit which is on our website now, go to the most recent one, go to where it looks at your current liabilities, it actually will show what is a deferred developer fee and so that since it's deferred it's still a liability and so what you could get on those projects was a million dollars apiece

and so it's gonna show South First Street.

I can't remember the number on South First Street.

It's gonna show Crescent Halls because I just looked at it.

It's $800,000 is deferred back into the project.

So it was never received.

That means it's still a liability on the project itself to pay it back.

And so each one of those projects will have that.

It will take some time, but if you go through each one, just go to the most recent audit, it will have both the deferred and what has been paid out.

to the CRHA.

Any money that's paid out to CRHA goes into its regular budget, goes into CRHA's budget.

And if you remember, we've talked about how tenants have not paid rent.

We've kept staff.

And so if tenants don't pay rent and rent pays those salaries, that money's coming from somewhere.

And so we've talked about all of these things around

the funding.

And so if there are more questions around the developer fee, we can talk about that.

And I will say every entity, nonprofit that the city funds is collecting a developer fee when they do lie tech.

So I just hope these questions are mutually shared across the platform.

I was going to address that point actually and maybe it's a misunderstanding because I didn't see that question come up in the correspondence before today.

I thought the questions were about the loans and the misunderstanding that somehow CCDC is sitting on a pile of its own cash that it loans.

All of these loans are passed through.

Some of the money comes from AHOF, which is an entity that Ashley Davies and others is part of and it receives donations that are private donations.

and then it loans that money into the deal through CCDC and the rest of the money is city money that makes up the other promissory note, which is why there's two promissory notes for each deal.

All of these notes and the deferred developer fees are completely standard in low income housing tax credit transactions, particularly those involving a housing authority.

We would be hard pressed to find a housing authority that doesn't have a deferred developer fee scenario.

And again, I mean, these are questions that are going to be coming from council as a whole with the request for eight plus million dollars in property acquisition.

So if they're all answerable, that's great.

I'm just saying.

anticipate these will be coming and if they have answers I think that will give council more comfort in considering an allocation of that size and again I think the questions I think from the conversations I've had among council are more about those LIHTC developer fees as opposed to the pass-through loans and they connect with like

People are aware that LIHTC developer fees are standard, as well as Forever Housing Authority affiliate organization is standard, and that it comes in as unrestricted income, and that's totally normal.

I think the question from council has been from its creation in 2019, which again, was before anyone was here, so no one here is responsible for this structure.

But the fact that it's not a 501c3 means there's not required reporting of expenditures that are public, which

Other housing organizations do have that structure locally in terms of not being a stock corporation.

And then the governing documents I could find from 2019 don't require full blending within the audit or operating budget.

And it may be with the LIHTC developer fees, there just hasn't been much that has come in to this point.

And that may be an issue that's over time as more projects like South First Street, Phase Two and Sixth Street are completed that more revenue may come in from there.

on the LIHTC developer fee side and the concern is just where is the expenditures reported and how does council track that in budgets and so it may be a question of in the governing documents from 2019 just clarifying

I wanted to respond because that's not accurate.

The fact that the entity is a stock O'Rourke or a 501C3 entity doesn't change at all its reporting obligations because CRHA is the sole owner of CCDC.

It is a component unit.

It is not a secret.

Are there LIHTC developer fees reflected in the audit?

I could absolutely be wrong.

That's not accurate either.

You can see the audits both for the LIHTC project and for CRHA.

And you can track exactly what's happening at the deal level and where the funds go and where the developer fees are

And for the deals that have not yet reached the point of the deferred developer fee promissory note being reflected or discussed in the documents, then that will come later.

But for the deals that already exist where the developer fee is reinvested in the form of a deferral, that's already explained in those documents.

There is nothing else that needs to be done.

There is not a housing authority affiliate entity that has in its bylaws a sentence saying how the deferred developer fee is going to be reflected.

It doesn't happen.

We don't get to that granular level of detail in bylaws.

And I know I didn't form that entity, but if I had formed it, the bylaws would not look any different from what Williams Holland did.

There is nothing that's being hidden there.

Yeah, I'm just, I was looking at the requested documents.

from council, and we'll be discussing those and the status of all of that in the retreat on Saturday.

But the developer fees aren't mentioned.

Nothing specific about the developer fees are mentioned.

So that's a new

It's a new question.

It's already addressed.

It's going to be addressed in the documents because it's already there.

But that's a different.

That's a new question.

Well I would just say I mean this has been

a long standing, not long standing, but a question council has been asking for, you know, months at this point, at least from the conversations I've had.

Yeah.

Did they ask you and you not bring it back?

Like who did council ask?

Because my problem is, and I'm,

Forget it at this point.

My problem is you say in emails, comments that make me look bad like, oh, there's $25 million out there.

Maybe A-Haul stopped contributing to CRHA because they're not reporting.

Well, guess what?

You're wrong.

And you don't have a relationship with any of those folks to actually figure that out because they're all begging me to stay here at this organization because they're worried what happens if I leave.

and so for you to make statements like that that just aren't true about maybe they're not giving it to CRHA because of John's leadership.

That's the complete opposite.

They're worried about giving it to CRHA if John leaves.

And so for you to at the last minute to make a comment about the big concern is development fee but it has never been mentioned and then you say for months you've been asking, this is a public meeting.

That's a lie.

We should call it out.

The same thing I ask you to do when you hear lies in front of city council.

Call them out.

I'm calling you out.

That's a lie.

So I received that and I don't know.

shy away from acknowledging, there could be, there's definitely communication gaps.

I would say from my perspective, you know, council has had conversations when your resignation was announced and council was looking at

if that is the case how do we prepare for what the change is going to be and started looking for all available documents that could assist that transition.

Obviously things have changed since then and then flowing from that as well there's the recent request for you know those nearly 10 million dollars for property acquisitions and council's question was that we'll eat up our existing surplus and there's other investments in you

Harthwood, Wortland Street that we're considering as well and questions from council came in about given the leadership transition that was announced that people were expecting in the size of that request just seeing

These financials in terms of budgets and audits weren't reviewable.

They've since been posted and I think it was a question of not hiding anything, not doing anything wrong, but council wanting to review and assess.

the full financial condition of CRHA for a request of that size and so that's where the questions are coming from and that's my perspective I think I receive that it's a very difficult time for

CRHA where it feels like there's a lot of criticism coming in and I also understand perspective of why all CRHA are these questions being asked, PHA of Habitat I think that's a very fair point that I totally understand but

I don't know if that answers your question but that's kind of the perspective I'm coming from I'm certainly not intending to ever lie or try to present a particular narrative I'm just trying to reflect back questions that are coming in from council to secure those very sizable investments going forward

and I totally own, like I'm trying to review all these documents myself for the first time when you announced your resignation and these are things, I'm not a CPA, I'm not an accountant, these are documents I haven't requested in the past, you know, I'm just trying to get them and look through them myself, recognizing, you know, I'm not gonna fully understand them, but just trying to ask questions that come up as I review them that also are responding to council's concerns.

So I have no problem admitting there are questions I've asked

Is there a reason why a council is not attending these meetings if they're so concerned?

I think also there's a frustration with statements about we've been asking for this for months or things like that when

nor I nor John seemed to know when or where those requests came in and by whom at what point.

And so I think there have been allegations of

like lack of communication on our part, but for the last three months since we've been discussing the CRHA leadership, I feel like the miscommunications or communication gaps have more consistently been happening on that side.

And it seems like there are narratives being perpetuated that actually are things that

need to be worked on on the other end.

And it's not creating conditions for collaborative partnership for these types of interactions to continue happening.

Yes, I do.

I guess for me the frustration is that I'm reading all these emails and all this narrative based on complete misconceptions, misunderstandings, and if not outright lies going on for months, but at no point are the experts brought into the room.

I didn't know until tonight that the question was about the developer fee.

I was never asked.

LIHTC is what I've been doing for a living for the past 25 years.

but yet in the meantime there are tons of emails with veiled accusations of hiding money or secret entity that nobody's ever heard of which is absolutely not true and it is reflected in the documents and I get it, not everyone is a CPA but to say that CCDC has not been reflected anywhere is simply not accurate

Those financial statements, they may not have been on the website in a way that could be found by everybody, but they were part of your board packets.

They've been voted on.

They've been reviewed with your auditors.

This is not a secret.

The information is available, and if there were questions, we are the experts, and we could have been asked to answer those questions.

The lettering question from the city, I've seen it.

It doesn't mention developer fees.

all the emails I have seen them and they seem to assume that CCDC has its own coffers full of money and that it uses that money for those loans that is absolutely inaccurate but the problem is those emails continue and people keep making assumptions that are inaccurate and then it leads to this big chaotic frustration where people now have to somehow correct a narrative

because it's been false for months but nobody asked us for the reality.

and I mean to be clear that is not where I'm coming from of trying to make an accusation that something nefarious has happened I understand the frustration I don't think there is any element of lying or intentionally lying on my part or anyone

else on council that I'm aware of.

I think now and forward, I'm comfortable having difficult conversations and I think this is helpful to clear

things up and questions that were asked if they were incorrect or grounded and wrong assumptions and being able to clear that up in public I think is a positive thing.

Again, I mean from my perspective, I think where I'm coming from and my primary concern is just speaking honestly, I think with the, for city council, the PPP loan situation, not the,

receipt of them but council not learning about it only through the news for council hurt trust between CRHA and city council and city government and I think that trust can be repaired but it was damaged a little bit and as part of that and then flowing from after that the announced resignation council was looking at that as well what are we gonna do here?

What is the next step for CRHA gonna be because we've got

and then after that a request for nearly 10 million dollars for property acquisitions and so from that was just I think there are things that could help restore that trust and as you said Vice Chair I think it's a very fair point it's a two-way street I think trust clearly for CRHA has also been damaged between you know how they perceive city council and city government and

No fear in acknowledging that and that's something that we've got to work on on our end as well but I think with you know this conversation around CCDC being able to clarify any points and if there are points where we can meet as the CCDC board and

Clarify reporting for going forward, if we can get into a rhythm of having written financials monthly and approving them, if we can get into, and progress is already made on this point, posting documents that were fully available, they weren't being hid, they just didn't happen to be on the website, and most of them aren't required to be on the website, just council couldn't see them

Progress has been made on posting those and I think if we can do all these things I think that trust can be repaired and restored but I think it's going to put without I'm just saying there's a request for a substantial amount of money

These things I think will help put a majority of council and city government in a position where they feel more comfortable making investments of that scale.

People disagree with me, that's fine.

Thank you, Michael.

I just wanted to say one thing that you said there was written financials monthly, whereas the request actually I think said quarterly.

So if it's monthly, again, we need things to be kind of buttoned up as far as what the actual requests are.

and those requests Brigid has outlined in a beautiful spreadsheet.

And so if you look at that spreadsheet and see things that are not aligned with what you thought you were asking, I think it would be good for you to go through that with a fine tooth comb and have other council members also go through that with a fine tooth comb so that we can ensure that we are working towards the kind of level of transparency and collaboration that is necessary to do the work of

for maintaining the good work that CRHA is doing.

And I want to remind us that we are doing something that is serving residents and that all of this kind of disagreement and lack of trust and negative assumptions or narratives that we're promoting ultimately at the end of the day is hurting the families who live in these units.

That is, I think, extremely frustrating because as John talked about and as Kathleen talked about at the meeting with the city in September, these NOE units are really important to maintain and there's a lot of reasons why we are coming to the city with a request for partnership and for money on this.

I agree, I also just wanna say like

So we received the request from council.

We sent a letter back acknowledging the request from council with our own asks.

We have not received a response to that.

Well, I guess we received acknowledgment seven days later of receipt and that it's being reviewed.

but we are tracking what was asked for.

We can't respond and I fear this is part of how the narrative that's out there got out there is that we are asked for something that is perhaps not exactly what you want and if it's not what you want but we've delivered what you asked for, that's not failing to respond to the request.

anticipate all of the things that you might be looking for or that you might be thinking about or the questions you might have, like we're responding to the request that was made.

So, you know, case in point, there's now a meeting on Tuesday with council that we found out about yesterday.

You know, we have jobs and so like I think

I mean, to be perfectly honest, I didn't have distrust of counsel until the interactions that I have had recently as board chair, and they have been.

aggressive and not professional.

And so, you know, I'm going to deliver what was asked for.

I am not, it's like whatever's going on behind the scenes needs to stop.

It's not constructive and it's not good for residents.

And I'm going to say that publicly.

I mean, based on the experiences I've had over the past couple of months,

I'm just ashamed.

I don't even have another word for it.

So, I mean, we're gonna deliver what it is, but the distrust is definitely going both ways at this point.

and again like I genuinely appreciate the frank conversation even if it's difficult.

I think it's important to have these conversations because clearly there's been a lot of tensions and I think this is part of trying to restore the relationship between council and CRHA to where it needs to be.

I may just be repeating myself but again I think the issue is whether

It's fair, unfair, whatever you may think about it.

The trust between city council and CRHA was damaged with learning about the PPP loan situation through the press for the first time.

And following that, the resignation is what led to looking for the budgets, the audits.

They didn't happen to be posted online.

Council wasn't able to review them.

They were receiving requests for nearly $10 million.

again I mean I agree I mean my perspective whether people believe me or not my perspective genuinely is that motto of residents first and I do believe everyone in this room shares that goal and my concern is just if council isn't in a place where they feel committed to making tens of you know eight million dollars for acquisitions

that is a risk to being able to maximize the amount of affordable units that can be protected and provided and I want to ensure council feels confident in making investments of that scale and again I feel like I'm repeating myself but that's where I'm coming from and again I do feel like

These conversations are part of, I think, what's needed to happen for us to move forward, and I think, again, progress on posting those things online has already happened, whether it's, whatever the rhythm is, written financials that are approved on some basis will help, the recent budget, again, it existed, it just wasn't online, that's been provided for council to review, I genuinely do think those things will get council in a place of kind of,

Can I just get in really quick?

I'm going to say it and then I'm going to just leave it.

One of the first individuals I talked to after the P.P.

loan was you.

Correct.

And the way you made me feel when I got off the call was the support.

What you told me was, John, this is nothing.

other agencies and nonprofits have gone through much more.

You will get through this.

I'm not looking for your job.

I think you're doing a good job.

We're gonna get through this.

This is not a problem.

Other agencies, much bigger.

This is nothing.

That was completely different than how you have treated me and how it has been since then.

And so I'm glad that we're now bringing out what really is the root of the issue, which is the PPP loan.

And I think we've been pretty open about what we are going to say in public about that, but

I think that's even different than what we've even talked about of like trying to break through this and get on the other side of where we are currently.

And so I think in order for us to get there we have to really be open and ask for what we're looking for.

Like if the developer fee information was what you were looking for, ask that.

because it's not like we're gonna go through, it's like, oh, let's make something up, let's figure it out, to trick them, to get us in line, no.

And so let's be open and honest about what we're looking for because even if you get that audit document, you might not know what you're looking at because you may look at that document and say, oh yeah, they've received $800,000.

No, that's what's promised if we can get to the other end.

And honestly, it won't be given.

What will end up happening is we'll take possession, and we'll consider that debt that we're going to take, and then we'll forgive our own debt so then we don't pay ourselves back.

That's what will end up happening, most likely, because neither project will ever produce enough money to cash flow to give everyone what they're owed, and we're not even number one position for what's owed even on soft debt.

we just in order to like amend this we have to be truthful about what we're really looking for so then we can give that to you otherwise it feels like a witch hunt because that's how it has felt I like the last if I was leaving if I was to leave the last month I've only dealt with putting out fires from requests from city council and staff

Right.

No, and I hear that, and I'm genuine in saying that is not my intent to try to come across as like a witch hunt.

And again, I mean, just speaking honestly, there was a concern.

Are there other financial risks when learning about the hit of the PPP loan situation through the media?

Not that anything was nefarious, not that anything's hidden, but are there just any other risks to help

to ensure the agency is in the strongest place as it can be.

I've never asked for your resignation.

I've never demanded it.

But these things are also, they've been reported on in the press.

They're following up on press reports about agendas, then following requests from city council around

operating budgets, audits, these things it's not just me it's Council as a whole looking at there are some things they were concerned about to clean up and it's not that anything's nefarious or hidden but just

But I hear you.

It's a two-way street.

But that's where I'm coming from.

That's what I perceive.

I can't speak for what other counselors or staff say or do.

But that's where I'm coming from.

And I think progress has been made on addressing those concerns.

I think they're not coming with ulterior motives.

but I also think that's where we need you as the council rep to step in.

You received the budget, you actually didn't attend the meeting to pass the budget but you gave comments like hey, you all were added to a fundamental organization, fundamental agency and so you received an increase in funding but hey, I didn't see the eviction diversion grant or funding for that in the city budget.

Where does that act?

And then I believe Kathleen provided that

It went nowhere.

The city said they never received it, never heard anything about it.

And so like Delphine mentioned, there are agendas that have these packages in it.

So yes, we did not do a good job of putting everything online.

That will not be the case.

If you look at our website, that won't be the case in the future.

You won't be able to get us on that.

So is it?

that you, what we, or what I assumed was that you would be the advocate for the housing authority.

So when they have questions about our budgets, like, hey, here's the budget, this is where we are.

We had to lose positions last year because of these issues.

And so we're not even optimizing to where we were a year ago because of these issues.

But it seems like

No, everyone was in the dark.

Like, you know, when the housing authority was just off to its own, like no one knew what was happening here.

But you do, because Jake Dooley even came and presented the audit, which we've normally never had him attend and present the audit.

It was like one of the first times we had done that in a couple of years.

And so there has to be a way where information, where any counselors have questions,

You are giving answers because of the information you have.

Or if you don't let us know so then I can help you with those because I don't want anyone to have questions.

We've been working on the Silk Purse acquisition, I want to say almost a year.

Yes, over a year.

We started talking to him before Christmas last year, trying to determine when to close.

I'll say he wanted to close it eight months ago.

CRHA didn't push it back I've been talking to the city about what they want in a presentation and it just got put on the agenda because the owner said hey if you don't tell me what to do I'm gonna change and figure something else out so yes these things all happened on the domino effect but they were so spaced out it didn't have to be that way it was only that way because

There was no communication on the other end on how these things should flow.

And when I used to go directly to city council members, which used to be my process, whenever I wanted something to put an email together with all the city council members, so that was not the proper way of doing things.

So we need to know how the city wants these things.

Well, again, not wanting to repeat my, you know, I think the point the vice chairs made and others have made, the important thing is the residents of public housing and serving them as best as possible, you know, so to me,

How do we move forward?

And to your point, when I receive questions from counsel about what's going on with the PPP loan situation in terms of did it reach the CRHA board, how did you learn about it, and they're asking where's the operating budget, where's the audit, and I'm not able to

go online and provide that to them I can't answer their question and that's where some of the requests are coming from is there a better way to ask for that information to get it I'm open to that that's fair but that's where I'm coming from and again we've got an upcoming request for

nearly $10 million coming up next week for property acquisitions.

How can we get aligned as best as possible to have a majority of council, because again I'm one of five, it takes three to do anything, have them feel as comfortable as possible in making that investment.

I think progress has been made on some of those points.

as difficult as the conversation's been tonight.

I think this is actually necessary and important and helpful to try and get to that point with the CC, to return to CCDC specifically.

I think to just, and I think we were already planning on this, to meet as the CCDC board, see if there's anything we can do to have the governing documents which were created before anyone was here in 2019 at a period when the city was also going through 20 different city managers

Can we clarify that in a way that just eases up any concerns and questions that Council has, which I think we can.

Yeah I think I mean it sounds to me like maybe what needs to happen is is that in addition to the presentation that John was planning on making that there needs to be as Delphine suggested a presentation to the city councilors about CCDC by experts right because I think if that's the concern and if like the way that I'm hearing what you're saying is

is that like we are at real risk of not receiving funds from the city to keep these units like these NOAA units.

That's the way that I'm hearing it.

If that's wrong, please feel free to correct me.

Because of all of these kind of concerns over CCDC and the financials,

then if that's the case then like we need to know that right and that needs to be a part of the ask for things because we want to make sure that we are again putting our residents and the best possible stakes by giving all the information that people want to feel comfortable to vote in favor of these things and so again I think the like

specificity, transparency, kind of regular communication is important.

And if the concerns around CCDCs arrived or rose over the summer when we learned about the PPP loans, we certainly didn't get that request until two weeks ago.

So the kind of timeliness factor I think also needs to be improved on that front.

So like the timeliness and specificity of asks

And I think the concerns from council are about documentation as a whole and CCDC is a subset of that.

It certainly rose as higher than other concerns, but it was as a whole about written financials, agendas, audits, budgets available on the website and publicly available.

And again, progress is being made on those points.

But again, I think the fundamental thing is just

Yes, but then you know tonight that our initial conversation was around the development fees right so like that's you know we've been hearing a couple different things on what the priorities are and I think that really needs to be nailed down and not just your priorities but again as you said your 105 all five people priorities and so like when we get a request

Just regarding some of the things that have been, that we're saying, I guess the narrative is that like information wasn't around, like we get a lot of this stuff in our board packets and those are emailed to us.

you know, relitigate things.

But there were some real issues.

The budget was available in a packet from what I could find.

The audit wasn't.

There weren't written financials for a long period of time that were presented to the board as it used to be.

Many of these things have, you know, I didn't have access to project LLC audits.

Many of the things have been addressed.

I'm just saying it wasn't,

Totally.

I think that's fair.

I think another avenue would have been to email John and ask him for it, as opposed to rising this to the level of we might not be able to support the entire entity because

we can't find these things.

It's just emailing John or calling John and saying, hey, this needs to improve.

I feel like, I don't know, I've never had an experience where even if we disagreed on the outcome of something or the process of something, we still, I never didn't have communication from John in terms of trying to answer a question of mine.

So I think this became escalated and I think that's potentially why it feels like

a witch hunt is because the initial ask of like, oh, I'm having a hard time finding this, can you just help me?

Well again I think at this point the most important thing to me is for next week when a request is coming before council for that nearly 10 million dollar investment to be able to answer all the questions that council has I'm open to fully receive you know I can communicate with specificity and talk to every councilor individually and see what their specific questions are and then

to reach out to the board chair, vice chair, and John to communicate that in preparation for next week's meeting.

And I think with CCDC specifically, it doesn't need to happen by, you know, Monday, but just us being ready to meet as the CCDC board, review the governing documents and ensure that over time when LIHTC developer fees come in,

Totally and I think we can

you know we can also be clear about when we're putting our CCD hats on in board meetings and there are like there are things that we can improve and that's I agree with you like that can be more explicit but I think like yes if there are specific questions that you know like or that you can ascertain and advance so that John can be prepared to answer them in a way that everybody is prepared to hear that is

My understanding is most of them are reflected in that spreadsheet you referenced.

Maybe a miscommunication in terms of the CCDC, I think the understanding was that includes the Lytek developer fleas.

Clearly that was not adequately communicated, but that was the

assumption.

And I do think that reflects most of my understanding of what questions are.

That would be awesome.

Thank you.

So I think we can prepare for that to answer questions.

But the request does not have our deliverables due until the 20th.

And as communicated in our letter back to counsel,

We have secured a firm to do an audit specifically of CCDC, but that is not going to be complete by the 20th.

and I can't speak for other counselors so this is just my impression but it could certainly be wrong.

Yeah and the status of everything, I mean I've shared it with everyone on the board so everybody knows exactly where we are.

There's a plan to have the first meeting of the year for CCDC in January.

The bylaws for the CCDC are in the package, including all the incorporation documents.

If you guys would like we can potentially schedule a meeting to go through those if there are changes needed.

I have not spent a lot of time looking at these.

This document myself and so I can't even give comments on it Delphine was able to review it and Like she said she didn't draft it, but there's nothing in there.

She would recommend changing she would have wrote it wrote it very similar and so but that's in there for you guys to review and

give comments on, but if there's anything else in between now and in January that you all would like to see around the CCDC, like I said, there are no financial budget, there's not a GL code, we don't have it set up as a property in our system because all the money is a pass-through, it has no expenses attached to it and so we can give like their promissory notes

They're referenced in the documents as well and audits and so those things can easily be made available.

But let us know what is needed on that end.

And that would be a separate meeting?

So what we'll do is we'll have our board meeting first.

We'll close that out.

will go into a CCDC meeting as an official meeting.

It will be a very similar process once we kick off the nonprofit.

Correct.

Thank you.

This may be something we discuss on Saturday.

That's schedule for Saturday.

And we've kind of already discussed it, so if there's nothing else, that's totally fine.

No, not now.

I have process questions around disposition of property.

Partnership with name on title is still the perfect or continued practice we want to go with.

And then around reporting, I know we talked over a year ago when we had the joint meeting about setting up a reporting process for city housing.

There was city staff change and that never happened.

and so just creating these processes.

So cities don't typically own houses that they rent.

It's just not common.

And so this is an uncommon practice that we have where the city is joint owners.

You all are now requesting

personal information from tenants that we never agreed to provide part of the reporting.

So I'm not familiar with that, could you just?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

So it's part of the reporting process and so I made this request last year and so you all, well I won't say you, but someone, city council reference reports and so one of those reports is around city housing.

Residents deserve the right to confidentiality and privacy to their personal information and so a lot of that

cannot and will not be shared by CRHA unless residents say, hey, we are free and open to that being the case and being the practice.

I think Delphine will probably agree that that's confidential information that we can't just provide it.

Like HUD, the residents actually sign saying, yep, this information will be provided to all the federal parties and they can do what they want.

But we don't have that same relationship with no one.

What you all receive as a report is what I can provide without CRHA providing confidential information that residents didn't sign saying we can provide and so I think we need to have some clarity around that.

I've been asking for it now for a couple years but we still don't have it because we still don't have that report on

Their name, you can't give them their name, what address they're staying in.

Dogwood and NOAA only, because I don't give them that information for tax credit.

I just give them the number of units and number of folks in the income variance.

Yeah, any questions we can get in advance would be helpful.

Okay.

All right, I will move.

That's fine if you don't have any comments.

I don't have any comment at this time.

Thanks.

Thank you, Emily.

Okay.

If there's nothing else, that concludes our agenda for this evening.

I think they must have their local politics class.

the baby's name.

Oh my God, yeah.

It's scary.

Yeah, exactly.

Oh, yes.

Yeah, I'm very excited.

Oh, these pajamas.

Next.

Wait, how is it so cold?