Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Meeting Packet - Housing - 9/12/2011
BOULDER HOUSING PARTNERS ANNUAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS SEPTEMBER 12,20112:30 PM BHP OFFICE 4800 N. BROADWAY, BOULDER COLORADO Our primary mission is to provide quality affordable housing that is developed and managed with respect for the dignity of all involved. We also seek to create a sense of community strength and spirit that supports resident efforts to realize success in their lives. REGULAR AGENDA 1. Call to order II. Determination of Quorum III. Public Participation** IV. Board Announcements V. Committee Reports 1. Governance 2. Finance/Audit 3. Resident Representative Council 4. Boulder Housing Partners Foundation 5. Development VI. Approval of the Agenda VII. Consent Agenda 1. Minutes from July 11, 2011 VIII. Action and Discussion Agenda Directors Report 1. Updates Management Report 1. July 2011 Financial Summary Development Report 1. Resolution #12: Private Activity Bonds 2. Lee Hill 3. Updates: High Mar, Red Oak Park X. Adjourn Any member of the public is invited to address the Board on any topic that is on, or not on, the agenda during Public Participation. Anyone wishing to speak will have the floor for a maximum of 3 minutes. BOULDER HOUSING PARTNERS REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JULY 11, 2011,2:30 PM 4800 BROADWAY, BOULDER COLORADO Commissioner Topping Betsey Martens Kathy Haddock, CAO Commissioner Eckert Willa Johnson Andy Proctor, HHS Commissioner McCormick Stuart Grogan Commissioner Ageton Jim Koczela Public: Commissioner Holton Penny Hannegan Louise Smart Commissioner Klerman Tim Beal Commissioner Hempel (absent) Lindsay Moss Commissioner Lawrence Kevin Knapp (absent) Commissioner Mitchell (absent) 1. Call to order Commissioner McCormick called the regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners to order at 2:37 pm. II. Determination of Quorum A quorum was declared. III. Public Participation There was no public participation. IV. Board Development The conference call to discuss the impact of Moving To Work (MTW) from the Board's perspective with Board members from Keene, New Hampshire was postponed to September. Commissioners should send the questions they would like to address with the Keene Board members to Betsey. V. Board Announcements The Board thanked and gave a round of hearty applause to Louise Smart for her 22 years of service on the BHP Board of Commissioners and the BHP Foundation Board. Commissioner Eckert reported on the high value of his attendance at the HUD sponsored Healthy Homes conference. 1 Commissioner Ageton expressed her appreciation for the BHP update memo sent earlier in the month to the City Council. She said it was the right level of detail and could be an annual update for the years BHP does not meet with the City Council in person. VI. Board Committee Reports Governance The Governance Committee did not meet. Finance Commissioner Topping, reporting for the Finance Committee, stated that with the sale of the Bluff St. duplex, we had concluded the asset disposition project. The Commissioners commended Willa on finishing up the sales and receiving 97% of the targeted proceeds from the dispositions. Commissioner Topping reminded the staff and Board to keep an eye on BHP reserves as we work through the MTW public housing conversions. RRC No report as the RRC is on summer recess. Foundation Commissioner Holton, reporting for the Foundation Board, encouraged the Board to attend the August 10, 2011 grand opening of Red Oak Park. The Foundation will be involved in helping to coordinate that event. Commissioner Holton reported that the Board had agreed at their last meeting on a method to recognize the BHP staff resources that are dedicated to supporting the Foundation. He also noted that the Foundation will be working on solidifying their fundraising plan at next month's meeting. Development The Development Committee held a joint brainstorming session with the Finance Committee to generate ideas to bring funding to our development projects. At that meeting, staff had presented a "tool box" of 29 different funding ideas that could be used in addition, or instead of, 9% tax credits. Commissioner McCormick will share the "tool box" with the Affordable Housing Task Force. 2 VII. Approval of the Agenda Consent agenda items: 1. Minutes from June 13, 2011 COMMISSIONER 7KLERMAN MOVED TO APPR OVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. COMMISSIONER TOPPING SECONDED THE MOTION. The motion passed unanimously. VIII. Action Agenda Directors Report Summary of City Issues Betsey noted that the scope of the city's Design Advisory Board had expanded and could potentially impact the Lee Hill development. Commissioner Ageton noted it was a new initiative and changes were anticipated. Staff was asked to research the question. Management Rei)ort May Financials Jim K. presented the May financials and answered questions from the Board. Bridgewalk Refinance: Resolution #10 The Board discussed the loan for the Bridgewalk redevelopment using Wells Fargo. Kathy Haddock and Andy Proctor gave an update on the City's dispute with Wells Fargo. COMMISSIONER TOPPING MOVED TO TABLE THE DISCUSSION WHILE BHP STAFF DISCUSSED TIMING ISSUES FOR THE WELLS FARGO LOAN WITH CITY STAFF. COMMISSIONER KLERMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. The motion passed unanimously. 3 Development Report Lee Hill Housing: Amended Guiding Principles Stuart explained the proposed changes to the Guiding Principles for the Lee Hill project suggested by the Boulder Shelter for the Homeless Board of Directors. COMMISSIONER ECKERT MOVED TO ADOPT THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES AS AMENDED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE BOULDER SHELTER FOR THE HOMELESS. COMMISSIONER AGETON SECONDED THE MOTION. The motion passed unanimously. Resolution 411: Ratification Creating 1175 Lee Hill, LLC Stuart described the purpose and proposed structure of the Lee Hill LLC. COMMISSIONER TOPPING MOVED TO APPROVE THE FORMATION OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION TO OWN, FINANCE, DEVELOP AND OPERATE A NEW HOUSING COMMUNITY AT 1175 LEE HILL ROAD. COMMISSIONER AGETON SECONDED THE MOTION. The motion passed unanimously. High Mar Stuart explained that BHP would be submitting the building permit for High Mar to learn of any structural, compliance or regulatory issues that might affect costs or the timing of the issuance of the permit while the work was still current with the design team but that BHP would not pull the permit until funding was certain. Commissioner Klerman suggested looking into the possibility of selling another asset, perhaps 101 Pearl or North Haven, to raise equity for High Mar. Stuart noted that staff will analyze the numbers and report back to the Board in September. Commissioner Holton suggested using BHP and loan fiends to build the project until the tax credits become available. Stuart explained that it would be nearly impossible to receive the tax credits after the project was completed. 4 Red Oak Park Kevin and Lindsay gave an update on the Red Oak Park development. They encouraged all Commissioners to attend the August 10, 2011 grand opening celebration. The Commissioners encouraged them to use and or get additional professional photos and to actively seek opportunities to get some recognition for the project, on our own or in partnership with a vendor, in the national and local media. 4600 Broadway Stuart introduced a new project, 4600 Broadway, to the Board and summarized a list of pros and cons of BHP being involved. Commissioner Klerman suggested that this might be a good pilot test using an external property management company that might operate the project at a lower per unit per annum cost. Commissioner McCormick wondered if these units are being developed as condos, and Commissioner Eckert noted that would be good from a construction perspective since it is a higher standard than for a rental, and the impact that might have on future sales. Stuart will check on the current plans for the project. Commissioner Topping summarized that the Board was interested and excited to move forward with this project. Management Report Continued... Bridgewalk Refinance: Resolution 910 The BHP and City staff returned from their recess discussing timing issues with the Wells Fargo loan. Based on their assessment, the Board made the following motion: COMMISSIONER TOPPING MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION #10 FOR THE PURPOSE OF REFINANCING THE BRIDGEWALK PROPERTY. COMMISSIONER KLERMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. The motion passed unanimously. s 5 f i The Board stated that it continues to be concerned about the dispute between Wells Fargo and the City of Boulder and directed staff to continue to support the city's negotiations in this dispute. IX. Adjourn COMMISSIONER AGETON MADE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS. COMMISSIONER HOLTON SECONDED THE MO'T'ION. The motion passed unanimously. The regular session of the Board of Commissioners adjourned at 5:00 pm SEAL DATE: 7/11/11 ANGELA MCCORMICK,CIIAIR Boulder Housing Partners m BETSEY MARTENS Executive Director PENNY HANNEGAN Recording Secretary 6 MEMORANDUM To: Board of Commissioners From: Betsey Martens, Executive Director Subject: Director's Report Date: September b, 2011 This month's Director's report includes: Consent: None at this time Action: None at this time Updates: Board Development Moving to Work Status 2010 Annual Report Retreat Planning Hold the Date NAHR4 Updates Items under Separate Cover City Issues Affecting Affordable Housing Attachments: Affordable Housing Task Force Recommendations (by email) Journal of Housing Article (by email) Summary of City Issues Affecting Affordable Housing ACTION I T EMS: None at this time UPDATES: Board Development: There is no Board development topic this month, per the Board schedule, because the Annual Dinner immediately follows the meeting. We try to keep the agenda lighter on Annual Dinner days. Next month we are scheduled for Tax Credits 201, followed by an MTW overview in November and a New Markets Tax Credit session to close out the year. 1 7 Status of Moving to Work Designation Last month I reported that the next big event in our MTW process is to get under contract with HUD. September 1 had been the goal to have the contract fully executed; however we didn't receive the first draft of the contract until late in the day on August 31. We are reviewing the draft as we prepare this memo and may have comments at the Board meeting. The MTW effort is now sufficiently embedded in the organization's activities that you will now find updates in both the Development Report and Management Report instead of monthly in my report. 2010 Annual Report The 2010 Annual Report will be distributed at Monday's meeting. It continues to be sent directly to the City Council and key partners in paper form and otherwise published on the website for the community and stakeholders to enjoy. Due to the web publishing approach, feel free to provide comments at any point following Monday's meeting. Retreat Planning The Board's annual retreat is scheduled for September 23, 2011 from 2 - 5 PM here at BHP. The focus of the retreat is the 2012 work plan and budget. While this is often sufficient material for the three hour time period, we often try to add another item. One thought, among many, is whether the Board wants to use some of its retreat time to discuss its questions on the proposed municipalization of Boulder's electricity utility. On that point, BHP hosted the first in a series of two forums on municipalization last week. Jonathan Koehen from the City's Office of Sustainability came last week and Bob Belamer a spokesperson from Excel Energy will he here th;s Th„rsday from 4-5 pm to dis-iss Boulder's energy future from Excel Energy's point of view. I welcome your thoughts about additional retreat agenda items. Hold the Date There continue to be a number of important dates that we hope you have on your calendars: • September 16: Ethics training for Board and staff 8 am - noon BHP • September 23: Annual Board retreat from 2-5 pm BHP • September 29: 1175 Lee Hill Outreach Meeting 6 - 8 pm Annoiy Building • September 30: New Year's Party at Thistle Community Housing 5 pm Conferences to also keep in mind: • Housing Now conference October 11-14, Vail, CO • NAHRO National conference October 23 - 25 St Louis MO 2 NAHRO The Board requested an occasional update of my NAHRO activities. There are a couple of things of note this month. August 26, 2011 was the date by which a challenging candidate for President would have to have submitted a petition to get on the ballot. I am pleased to report that no one is challenging and my campaign is officially retired. You will still receive a ballot since the Senior Vice President spot is contested, and you will also have an opportunity to `vote' for me. NAHRO's website is very helpful with regard to deciding how to vote for the '`dice President. As incoming President, one of the most important things I do is make appointments to a number of national committees. In fact, I appoint 169 people to committees, task forces and the Board of Governors. You can imagine the rubix cube that becomes in trying to find balance and representation by region, organization size, gender, race and ethnicity. I am almost done. I am still working with our sister organizations, PHADA (the Public Housing Directors Association) and CLPHA (the Council of Large PHAs) on a joint letter to the HUD Secretary about short-term and long-term regulatory relief in the face of serious reductions in FY2012 funds. You might have seen the August 18 article in the Wall St Journal about the Section 8 program. Titled "Raising Hell in Subsidized Housing" it was an uninformed and unflattering attack on the program. NAHRO very quickly wrote a response, which you can find here: http://www.nahro.org/news-content/naliro-issues-response-wsj-section-8-article. Under Separate Cover: Affordable Housing Task Force and Journal of Housing We are sending a couple of things electronically that you might find of interest. The first is a series of recommendations from the conclusion of the Affordable Housing Task Force's work. The second is the third in a series of articles that I wrote about affordable housing policy. City Issues affecting Affordable Housing Summary: There were several issues that staff identified for Board review that are currently under consideration by the City of Boulder; a summary is included in the attachments. ATTACHMENT Summary of Current City Issues Affecting Affordable Housing City Council Agrees to Put Utility Municipalization on the November Ballot Boulder is r2nidlV moving tnwnrc a decision on whether or not electricity should be provided by a City-owned municipal utility. in 2010, the City decided to not renew its electricity franchise agreement with Xcel Energy in favor of exploring alternative energy management options. Since the beginning of the year, the City has been researching the capital and ongoing costs associated with starting and running a municipal electric utility. Under a municipal utility, the City is proposing to not generate its own electricity but to be able to buy electricity from a combination of electric energy providers (including both conventional coal-fired and wind-generated or other alternative sources of electricity). Buying electricity from a broad market is anticipated to provide Boulder residents with electricity rates that are equal or less than Xcel's electricity rates and that are more stable over the next several decades, even as energy costs escalate. Since utility costs impact the affordability and operational viability of our housing, we are interested in the impacts of the potential municipalization of electricity in Boulder. On August 16, City Council approved to put the issue of municipalization to a vote of the people on the 2011 November ballot. In November, the voters will be asked whether they would authorize the City to create a local utility, with the understanding that no bond funding would be issued until the project financing is final, and that the project can be discontinued if found infeasible or if energy cannot be produced at a rate less than or equal to Xcel Energy's rate. The other ballot question will be to extend the Utility Occupation Tax for up to five years to help fund the due diligence and contract period associated with municipalization. Y Y If approved by voters and found economically feasible, municipalization would include a City purchase and transfer of all electricity lines, easements, rights and agreements within the city from Xcel Energy. It is possible that the City will be forced to condemn the lines and easements, if a mutually-acceptable agreement cannot be reached with Xcel Energy. The City will issue bonds to fund the acquisition and start-up costs of municipalization. More information on municipalization can be found at www.boulderenergyfuture.com Boulder-wide Community Survey To Be Released This Fall: About every two years, the City issues a community-wide survey to residents and CU students in order to gather information about what Boulder residents consider the most important issues and priorities for the community, as well as respondents' opinions about City services. The survey will be mailed to 3,500 random Boulder residents by the end of September. The survey was written and will be distributed by the National Research Center, who will also compile the results. This year's survey has been scaled down and its questions are designed to provide more useful and targeted information. The draft version is attached to this memo for your review. jd In the past, a Spanish-English version of the survey was mailed to all selected people. This year, an English-only survey will be distributed to the randomly-selected mailing list, with a postcard in Spanish directing respondents to the Spanish-language version of the survey. The City will then distribute Spanish-language surveys to community organizations serving Boulder's Spanish speakers. The results of the Spanish-language survey will be compiled separately, since respondents will not be randomly selected. We look forward to reviewing the results of the community survey when they are released in November and reporting back to the Board any significant findings City to Improve Effectiveness of Its Transportation Demand Management Requirements Part of a development project's requirements under the Site Review process includes creation of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan that meets the City's requirements. In July, City staff proposed a number of changes to how TDMs are evaluated during the Site Review process that would bring flexibility to meet the specifics of the project in question. Currently, a TDM for a new project includes multi-modal amenities and strategies that are intended to mitigate traffic impacts of new residential and commercial development, as well as to significantly reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips and to minimize the number of automobile miles traveled to and from the new development. Proposed changes to the TDM process consisted of reorganizing these amenities and strategies into several pre-grouped "packages" from which a development can choose two or more that meet the needs of their development. All packages are designed to address the City's transportation goals both individually and in combination. Significant strategies included in the packages include providing EcoPasses as well as parking management or financial incentives. In addition, City staff proposed making two TDM-related additional changes to the Boulder Revised Code: one requiring that staff showers and changing facilities be provided as part of new commercial development (to encourage bicycle commuting) and second that parking spaces be set aside for car/vanpool vehicles. The Transportation Advisory Board and the Planning Board reviewed these changes and provided comments. The City staff will also solicit feedback from developers. These changes will be included in the next regularly-scheduled code change sessions for approval by City Council. BHP's development projects are frequently subject to the requirements of the Site Review process, and changes to these requirements impact our new housing development. BHP values providing multi-modal transit options to our residents and currently we provide funds for resident EcoPasses as part of several of our recent development projects. We will monitor refinement of these new TDM guidelines for impact to our upcoming projects. f/ Housing for Vulnerable Residents Addressed in New Flood Response Ordinance Boulder is a high flood-risk city, especially in this year following the Four Mile and Dome wildfires. We have three properties that exist either within or next to the downtown floodplain: Canyon Point, Arapahoe Court, and Walnut Place. All three serve senior and disabled residents who would be vulnerable during a flood situation. BHP has worked with public services to develop evacuation plans for these sites, and we provide annual resident education on emergency evacuation procedures. The City has also begun work on a new ordinance (called the Critical Facilities and Mobile Population Ordinance) that would codify how to regulate and manage critical facilities (like hospitals, police and fire stations, and public facilities that would provide emergency shelter, as well as any businesses that use or store hazardous material), vulnerable residents (like those living in hospitals, nursing homes, or like our residents living in disabled/senior housing), and mobile populations (like visitors staying in hotels or hostels that may not realize the flood risk). City staff solicited feedback on the management strategies contained within the ordinance. In terms of our disabled and senior housing in the floodplain, the new ordinance would require that in the event of new development or substantial improvement or modification, that the lowest floor of each of the buildings would be protected to the level of the 500-year flood, plus one foot. This ordinance will go before City Council for its first reading in September and final reading in October Once this ordinance is approved, we will evaluate whether our planned rehabilitation of these or other sites will be subject to this ordinance. p~i 1 ~'~'Nqq'1•pR1lY XlY fi (Yp~' DiAn PpA~A09L~ cc t /~YY /.4'i i~.iL V41 1111. 1L LU{A b1✓ i1Vkl VJVJ Vi.l Y Re\. 1\ett I RTD has experienced significant budget difficulties in the past few years and has adopted a 2012 Strategic Budget Plan that includes $12 million worth of service reductions. Both BHP staff and residents rely on RTD services to provide viable and affordable transportation options. Proposed reductions in services that most impact our staff and residents include the following: • Reduction of service for the SKIP line along Broadway by increasing the frequency from 7 minutes to 10 minutes during peak times • Reduction in frequency of the BOLT route between Boulder and Longmont • Reduction of service for the B and S regional routes between Boulder and Denver • Reduction of service and frequency for the 204, 205 & 206 local routes providing north-south Boulder connections as well as service to east Boulder and Gunbarrel • Consolidation of the 203 and 225 routes between Boulder and Lafaytte/Broomfleld • Consolidation of the 209 and Stampede routes serving the east CU campus A public hearing on the proposed changes will be held sometime after the RTD Board's September 20 meeting. le Downtown Commercial Development Incentivized to Provide Community Benefit Recently, changes were made to the standards and guidelines for the downtown zoning districts. One change was the role expansion of the Downtown Design Advisory Board (reported on in the July City Issues Summary). As part of these changes, the DT-5 downto m zoning district was amended to include an additional density bonus awarded to commercial developments who agree to provide a "community benefit" as part of their development, which could include on-site residential use, space set aside for cultural or art uses, public open space or a Commercial Linkage Fee in the form of a Housing Excise Tax to support affordable housing. The Commercial Linkage Fee would be calculated from an estimate of needed affordable housing subsidy, the number of jobs created by the new commercial development, and the size of the development. BHP regularly requests capital fiends for affordable housing from the City. Any additional source of affordable housing funds increases funding opportunities for BHP and other affordable housing providers in the city. 13 City or Balm. 2011 Community SnveY ~F uP`3 1. Please read the following questions and circle the number which most closely reflects your opinion. very neither good eery N.A.* or good stood nor bad bad bad don't know Taking all things into consideration, how do you rate your overall quality of life in Boulder? .......................1 2 3 4 5 6 Haw do you rate the overall quality of your neighborhood?.:1 2 3 4 " i 5 6. How do you rate the sense of community in Boulder? 1 2 3 4 5 6 How do'you rate race and ethnic relations in'Boulder? .......1 2 3 - 4;; 5 6 How do you rate Boulder as a place to work? ....................1 2 3 4 5 6 How do you rate Boulder as a place to do business? :.,.......1 2 3 , 4 . S 6 2. Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to the City of Boulder as a whole: very neither good very N.A.* or good good nor bad bad bad don't know Shopping opportunities .....................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Employment opportunities...::;: .,.....:1 2 3 4 " 5 6Y Opportunities to attend arts/cultural events ........................1 2 3 4 5 6 Opportunities for higher /continuing education ' 2 3 4 5 6 Drinking water quality .......................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Access, 0 city,facilEties 1 2 3 4 5 6 Quality or character of new development ...........................1 2 3 4 5 6 Access:to a variety of;housing options. ...1 2 3 - „ :4 5 6 3. Please rate how safe you feel from each of the following in Boulder; very somewhat neither safe somewhat very safe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe Violent crimes (e.g,, rape, "robbery, ,homicide) l 2 3 4 5 Property crimes (e.g., burglary; theft, criminal mischief) i 2 3 4 5 Structural/house fires.: . i! 2 3 4 5 Wildland fires ............................................................................1 2 3 4 5 Floods.::. 1 2 3 4 5 Traffic-related incidents (road rage, bike-car conflicts, etc.) ..........1 2 3 4 5 Discrimination due'to your background or personal:characteristics.l 4 5 4. What do you think should be the top three priorities of the Boulder City Council in 2012? 1. 2, 3. * N.A. = not aPPACable Information Iteftft Boulder Community SurveyAW, ver, V W6 6 Page 1 ~7 S. The city has limited resources and must make hard decisions about funding priorities. How important, if at all, is it to you that the city allocates resources to each of the following areas? very slightly not at all important important important important Decreasing congestion and improving traffic flow :.1 2 3 4 Preserving the city's historic features and attributes ....................................1 2 3 4 Assistance to businesses to keep them h Boulder ` z 3 4 Neighborhood parks .................................................................................1 2 3 4 RcgUririg open space lands 1 2 3 4 Active recreational facilities (such as ballfields, play areas or playgrounds, etc.) .............................................................1 2 3 4 service§ f ,r children '(age 12 and under) 1 2 3 4 Services for youth (age 13 to 21) ...............................................................1 2 3 4 Services for'sen ors (age 65 and older) .....:....1 2 3 4 Providing spaces for and access to a variety of arts/cultural events .................................................................1 2 3 4 it in public places;.....: ..........A 2 3 4 Crime prevention ......................................................................................1 2 3 4 Transportation options or alternatives: .......;...1 4 Energy conservation and efficiency programs ..............................................1 2 3 4 Recycling and composting collection` sarAces i . ....................................:....1 2 3 4 Reducing homelessness ............................................................................1 2 3 4 i_brary`services. .,.....1: :z 3 4 Police presence in your neighborhood ........................................................1 2 3 4 Police presence in downtown areas. 2 3 Attracting/retaining "discount" or "affordable" shopping opportunities ..........................................................................1 2 3 4 Housing affordable to low or moderate income people . ...,.,.....1 2 Retention and expansion of quality jobs in Boulder ......................................1 2 3 4 Providing broadband internet connectivity wlth speeds higher than current commercial offerings,... ................................1 2 3 4 * N.A. =not applicable Information lteftft Boulder Community Survey 2M, ver. PW6 7 Page 2 1-5- 6. Are you eligible to have an Eco-Pass, an annual pass 7. Did you pick up your Eco-Pass? that allows you unlimited bus rides? ❑ yes (Please check all that apply,) ❑ no go to question #9 ❑ don't know if I am eligible for an Eco-Pass go to question #9 S. About how often, on average, do you ❑ no, I am not eligible for an Eco-Pass - go to question #9 use your Eco-Pass? ❑ yes, through my employer ❑ more than once a week ❑ yes, through my neighborhood program ❑ about once a month ❑ yes, a CU Boulder student Buff: One pass ❑ about once a week yes, CU Boulder faculty/staff Ruff One pass ❑ less often than once a month ❑ yes, other pass: I ❑ about once every two weeks I g. In the last 12 months, about how many times, if ever, have you done the following things? never 1-2 3-12 13-26 more than 26 ....1. 2 3 4 S Used the North, South or East Boulder Recreation Centers..::............... Participated in City of Boulder recreation programs, activities or events 1 2 3 4 5 Visited Boulder open space or mounfiain parks 2 3 4 5 . Visited a neighborhood park or playground (including tennis courts, Flatirons Golf Course, outdoor pools, and Boulder Reservoir) ..................1 2 3 4 5 Used the services or facilities of the East or,West'Senior Centers............::] Visited the Pearl Street Mall ............................1 2 3 4 5 Visited Twenty Ninth Street retail center.......:` _ ....1 2 5 . Visited the University Hill business district ................................................1 2 3 4 5 .......1 2 3 4 5 Used the Boulder:Creek bike and pedestrian path. . . Rode a high-frequency community transit network bus (e.g., HOP, SKIP, JUMP, etc.) within the City of Boulder ........................1 2 3 4 5 Rode anotherATO'bus:within.'Baulder , 2 3 4 5 Rode a bus between Boulder and Denver ................................................1 2 3 4 5 Commuted to work by.bicycle,. 5 Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from your home ..............................1 2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 Called in a complaint about a neighborhood problem: Attended a public meeting or event about city matters ...........................1 2 3 4 5 Attended a .City Council meeting ......,....:....1 2 3 ; 4 5 Watched a City Council meeting on cable TV Channel 8 ............................1 2 3 4 5 Watched a news program on cable TV Channel 8.:.,..,, ..1 2 3 4 5 Visited the City of Boulder Web site (www.bouldercolorado.gov) ...............1 2 3 4 5 completed a service transaction using the city website (registered for an event or program, financial transaction, etc,) ...1 2 3 4 5 Visited one of the city's social media websites (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) ................................................................................1 2 3 4 5 . Used any of the Boulder Public Libraries.( Main and/or the Reynolds, Meadows, or Carnegie branches) or 'used library information services via their Web site(s) .........1 2 3 4 . 5 Used the public computers or free Internet access at one of the Boulder Public Library facilities 1 2 3 4 5 Dialed :9-1-1............................ .t, .,.....:1 Volunteered for a city program (such as neighborhood clean-up, trail maintenance, library, etc.) ............................................................1 2 3 4 5 1 2 4 3 Made eneigy iinprovernent5 to your home or bushess *N.A. =not applicable Information IteftftBoulder Community Survey&At, ver, 1 68Page3 /f0 10. Please rate the quality of each of the following city services or programs. very neither good very N.A.* or good good nor bad bad bad don't know Overall city goveinment operations....' ...1 2 3 4 5 6 Flood or natural hazard education ......................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Fire.safeiy education ...,.,.1 2 - 3 4; 5 6 Snow and ice control on major streets ................................1 2 3 4 5 6 street repair (potholes; crack repair, etc..... .................1 2 3 4 5 6 Street sweeping ...............................................................1 2 3 4 5 . 6 Street lighting ......1 2 3.: Y: -.4 5 6 Hike paths and on-street bike lanes ....................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Sidewalk maintenance'' : ......................................1 .2 3 4 5 6 Median maintenance., .....................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Police traffic enforcement,.....: : .........1 2 3 4.: ? 5 6 Police response to community problems or needs ................1 2 3 4 5 6 Fire response ...............:1 2 3 4. 5 6 Emergency medical services ..............................................1 2 3 4 5 6 The City of Boulder Wei site {www.bou[dercoEarado.gov) ,..,1 2 3 - 4 5 6 Athletic Fields ..................................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Parks :in the city` . Open space and mountain parks ........................................1 2 3 4 5 6 North, South and East Recreation Centers 1 2 3 ` " 4' S ` 6 Other recreation facilities (golf course, outdoor pools) ........1 2 3 4 5 6 Parks and Recreation programs and classes,. . .................rl 2: 3 4 5.: Boulder Public Libraries .....................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Services for children and youth.,!,. : ,...,...1 2 3 4 5 6 Services for seniors ..........................................................1 2 3 4 5. 6 Services for law=income fiamilies ....,....1 2 3 4 5 ,F ° 6 Drinking water services 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sewer services„ . ,....,.1 2 6 Utility billing services ........................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 water conservation programs . 1 1 `3 4 5 6 Residential recycling program ............................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Renewable energy or energy efficiency programs..,.:: ........1 4 5 Building and housing inspection .........................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Enforcement of residential over occupancy ordinances....1 2 3 4 5 6 Noise control enforcement ................................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Enforcement of ice and snow removal;' trash, and weed control on private property,:.: .....,,;.........:...,...:;1 ° 2 3 4 Mosquito or pest control programs ....................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Boulder Municipal Court .........:........1 2 3 4 5il:i 6 11. If you have had phone or unperson contact with any Boulder city employee in the last 12 months, what was your impression? (Rate each characteristic below.) very neither good very N.A.* or good good nor bad bad bad don't know Courteous and .respectful ....::;...:......,.........,1 2 5 6 . . Knowledgeable .................................................................1 2 3 4 5 .6 Professional.,..,:. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Willingness to help or understand ......................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Respect for people of tlverse backgrounds .,....,:':1 2 3 Timeliness of response, if applicable ..................................1 2 3 4 5 6 Qverall impresson ...,1 ; 2 3 4 5 6 * NA. =not applicable Information I tePm& Boulder Community Survey.MAI, ver. A,Wd 9 Page 4 12. Please rate how well you think the City of Boulder does on each of the following: very neither well very N.A.* or well well nor poorly op, orlg oorl don't know Being responsive to residents ............................................1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Effectively planning for the future Working through critical issues facing the city .....................1 2 3 4 5 6 Gathering feedback from residents on'new,policies„or projects; conducting public processes ...............1 Z 3 4 5' 6.: Providing access to City Council .........................................1 2 3 4 5 6 InfQrrriirg residents about event~jriieetinalisues Spending your tax dollars wisely 1 2 3 4 5 6 Informing the public about how their.tax dollars are used ....1 3 4 5 b 13. Please rate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements. strongly neither agree strongly agree agree nor disagree disagree disagree 5 I am pleased with the overall direction the'dW is taking 4 I am well-informed on major issues in the City of Boulder 1 2 3 4 5 I take the initiative to let elected ofFcials or ;city staff know what I think..,..,. 1 2 3 4 5 I contribute time or money to charities or non-profits ................1 2 3 4 5 1 feel included In the Boulder communa ....1 2 3 4 5 ty. 14. Thinking of how you currently get information about events or issues in which you are interested, how likely, if at all, would you be to obtain information from the city about things like City Council meetings, community meetings, upcoming programs and events in the following formats? very slightly not at all N.A.* or likely likely likely like[v don't know Cable N Channel 8 ,1 2 3 4 5 City of Boulder Web site {www.bouldercolorado.gov) ........:1. Z 3 4 5 City social media websites (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube) The Boulder Daily Camera (hard copvor online newspaper).........:1 2 3 4 5 The Colorado Daily ..........1 2 3 4 5 Bouider County Business Report .,1 2 3 4' S Inserts in the water utility bill 1 2 3 4 5 Information provided at city facilities libraries, recreation centers, the municipal building, the planning department, etc.)..... 1` Z. 3 4 5 Mailings to your home address ......................................................1 2 3 4 5 Listserves (where you sign up to be part of a group receiving e-mails from the city) , ......1 2 3 4 5 Are there any other ways you'd like to receive information? Other Comments 15. Do you have any other comments you would like to make? * &A. = not applicable Information I taut Boulder Community 5urvey2 t 1, varPWO Q Page 5 /2 About you and your household The last fpwquestionsa► 'ahoutyouand your household.They are used to group survey responses. Your responses WI// be completely anonymous, 16. About how many years have you lived in 27. Do you have regular, convenient access to Boulder? (Record 0 if less than 6 months.) years the internet? 17. Are ❑ No go to question #28 you employed? 0 Yes Where. (check all that apply) ❑ No ❑ Yes Where do you work? 0 at home ❑ Work at home ❑ Boulder 0 at work ❑ Louisville © Lafayette ❑ on a "smart" phone or PDA ❑ Jefferson County ❑ Longmont ❑ a public facility (e.g. library or school) ❑ Broomfield/Interlocken ❑ Denver, excluding Tech Center 20. What is your age? 0 Tech Center/Southeast Denver ❑ 18-24 years old ❑ 55-64 years old ❑ Other city 0 25-34 years old 0 65-74 years old 1S. Are you a full- or part-time student at the 0 35-44 years old 0 75 or older University of Colorado, Boulder campus? 0 45-54 years old ❑ Yes, a full-time student go to question #20 29. What is the highest level of education you ❑ Yes, a part-time student go to question #20 have completed? 0 No 0 0-11 years, no diploma 19. Is anyone in your household a full- or part-time student 0 High school graduate at a higher education institution? 0 Some college, no degree ❑ Associate Degree 0 Yes ❑ Bachelor's Degree ❑ No ❑ Master's Degree 20. Please check the one box that most closely ❑ Doctorate Degree describes the type of housing unit you live in. 30. Are you of Chicano/Mexican-American, ❑ A detached single family home Latino/Latina, or Hispanic origin? 0 An apartment in an apartment complex ❑ Yes 0 No 0 An apartment in a single family home ❑ A condominium or town house 31. Which best describes your race? 0 A mobile home (Please check all that apply) ❑ Group quarters (dorm, sorority/fraternity house, ❑ American Indian, Eskimo or Aleut nursing home) go to question #27 ❑ Asian or Pacific Islander ❑ Other, please specify 0 Black or African American 2a.. Do you rent or own your residence= Please cl-e-Ck © White ❑ Other, please specify the appropriate box. (If you own a mobile home, but pay a lot fee, you own your residence.) 32. What is your preferred first language? 0 Rent 0 English go to question #34 ❑ Own (with mortgage payment) ❑ Arabic ❑ Korean ❑ Own (no mortgage payment) ❑ Chinese ❑ Mia, Hmong 0 French 0 Portuguese Xes no ❑ German ❑ Russian 22. Do any children age 12 or younger live in Ll Hebrew ❑ Spanish your household? El Ll ® Italian ❑ Vietnamese 23. Do any teenagers age 13 to IS live in your ❑ Japanese household? ❑ 0 0 Scandinavian languages 24. Are you or any members of your household ❑ Other, please specify age 65 or older? ❑ ❑ 33. Did you receive help completing this 25. Does any member of your household have questionnaire in English? a long-term disability? 0 ❑ Yes ❑ No 26. About how much was the TOTAL 2010 INCOME 34. What is your gender? BEFORE TAXES for your household as a whole? ❑ Male ❑ Female 0 Less than $10,000 0 $50,000 - $74,999 p/ease return co►n feted curve s to 0 $10,000 - $14,999 ❑ $75,000 - $99,999 P y 0 $15,000 - $24,999 ❑ $100,000 - $149,999 National Research Center ❑ $25,000 - $29,999 ❑ $150,000 - $199,999 300530': Street ❑ $30,000 - $34,999 ❑ $200,000 - $249,999 Boulder, CC 84301 0 $35,000 - $49,999 ❑ $250,000 or more * N.A. =not applicable Information I teltft Boulder Communtfy 5urvey2WII, verP 611 Page 6 MEMORANDUM To: Board of Commissioners From: Management Staff Subject: Report of Activity Date: 9/7/2011 This month's Management report includes: Consent: None Action: July 2011 Financial Summary Updates: Moving to Work Occupancy Status and Net Rental Income Utility Update Broadway West Solar Bridgewalk Update 2011 CDBG/CHAP Renovation Work 2012 CDBG/CHAP Grant Request Attachments: July 2011 Financial Statements Sample MTW factsheet CONSENT ITEMS: None at this time ACTION ITEMS: July 2011 Financial Summary July 2011 Boulder Housing Partners year-to-date revenues of $10,908,206 expenses of $10,192,065 and gains from the Sale of Bluff of 487,523, the settlement of an insurance claim for $90,000 and debt forgiveness of $326,901, results in net income of $1,620,565 versus a budgeted income of $795,048. The positive variance of $825,517 is explained as follows: 1 Zo Statement of Activities Tenant Dwelling Rental Income of $2,713,177 is unfavorable to budget by $68,788 (A) primarily due to the increased vacancies at Arapahoe East and Bridgewalk resulting from the rehabilitation work on each of these properties. Rental Write-offs are unfavorable to budget by $19,299 (B) as a result of a cleanup of the outstanding receivables list in and changing our accounting to establish a reserve for Bad Debt during the remainder of 2011. As a result of this change, 2011 will have an additional unbudgeted expense of approximately $30,000 through the remainder of 2011. Fee Revenue is favorable to budget by $145,528 (C) as a result of accounting changes for both development fees earned from capital grants (C1) and management fees earned from service grants (C2). Both of these programs have fee revenue that is payable to the Central Office Cost Center from the grant. This is an expense to the grant and fee revenue to BHP. The offsetting expense to this additional revenue is in Capital Improvement Grant Mgmt. Fees (0) and Service Grant Expense (C4). This revenue and expense will be eliminated in our consolidated financial statements but is grossed up to allow for HUD reporting. The 2012 budget will take this into consideration. Federal Capital Grants variance of $246,129 (D) is a timing difference between the budget and actual spending on capital projects. The 2011 allocation of Capital Funds for Public Housing has now been authorized by HUD however we have now targeted these funds to MTW use in 2012 so the variance is expected. Miscellaneous Revenue positive variance of $203,767 (E) includes a rebate of $161,000 from Xcel Energy for the solar system installed on Walnut Place. This cash was used to complete the Northport Solar system. In addition we have received unbudgeted income from Section 8 fraud recoveries and FSS forfeitures totaling $40,000. Of this amount only $13,000 is available for Section 8 administrative expenses. The remainder is restricted to iuiur% i1nD. Extraordinary Maintenance of $219,109 (F) includes expenditures for siding repairs at Kalmia; electrical work at Madison, Manhattan and Hayden Pl.; hazardous materials testing across all sites; rental license inspection fees; HVAC repair work at Sanitas Pl. and bedbug work across the portfolio. We will be reclassifying $53,000 of these expenses in August as a result of a detailed review and clarification of the definition of extraordinary vs. ordinary maintenance. Water and Sewer has a positive variance of $53,073 (G) which includes $38,000 from the Public Housing properties and Gas has a positive variance of $23,387 (H) which includes $18,000 from the Public Housing properties. This savings is attributed to the Energy Performance Contract work to reduce energy consumption at these sites. Selling expenses of $20,096 (1) relate to the sale of the property on Bluff Street which was completed in June. Amortization expense variance of $111,015 (J) includes the write-off in March of $13,469 related to an old, paid-off loan secured by 101 Pearl. The associated loan costs were never removed from the books. In addition, in July we discovered the Bridgewalk loan costs for 2 the maturing US Bank loans had been amortized over the 30 year loan amortization life rather than the 15 year maturity. This resulted in a July write-off of $52,546. Finally we expensed the remaining $28,255 of costs of the Mercy Loan for Bridgewalk which was paid off prior to maturity. We are reviewing the remaining loan costs to insure we only have appropriate costs left on the books and that the amortization schedule is correct. Any impact of this research will be recorded in August. HCV-HAP Expense positive variance of $259,555 (K) relates to the slower than budgeted lease up of the 100 new vouchers for non-elderly disabled individuals. Gain on Disposition of Property of $487,523 (L) is from the sale of the Fluff Street property and Extraordinary Income of $416,901 (M) includes the recognition of the forgiveness of debt by the City of Boulder in the amount of $326,901 (principal and interest) relating to Woodlands and the insurance settlement of $90,000 we received for the roof damage at Walnut Place. Balance Sheet The year-to-date increase in unrestricted cash of $402,430 (N) is more fully explained on the monthly cash report however the major items contributing to the increase are the receipt of $268,000 in developer fees from Broadway West, Walnut Place insurance settlement of $90,000 and the release from restriction of $186,000 that was previously set aside for Red Oak Park construction contingency. The collection of Accounts Receivable $817,269 (O) results from collection of grant revenues and developer fees from Broadway East, Broadway West and Vistoso. Restricted Cash (P1) declined as we spent money borrowed to complete the work at Public Housing sites for the Energy Performance Contract. There is a corresponding increase in Capital Assets (P2). Accounts Payable declined by $803,700 (Q) as we paid invoices on our construction projects that were accrued at year end. The large decline of Current Portion of Long Term Debt of $5,120,622 (Rl) reflects the entire balance due of $5,048,000 on the Bridgewalk Loans that were paid off in July. This decline is offset by the increase in Mortgages Payable of $5,761,542 (R2) as the refinanced loan is classified long term. Statement of Cash Flows The Statement of Cash Flows provides detail on the overall year-to-date increase in Cash and Cash equivalents of $402,430 (S). The significant items year-to-date are the (1) cash provided from collection of receivables (T 1) and used for the payment of accrued expenses (T2); and (2) the reduction in restricted cash (U I) which resulted in an increase in Real Estate Assets (U2). Portfolio Analysis Retort Overall performance of the portfolio remains strong with BHP debt service coverage at a combined 1.60 and the Tax Credit entities at 1.46. Bridgewalk remains strong during the rehab process at 1.52. This will be affected by the increasing balance of the debt as 3 zZ construction proceeds and by increasing rents on the remodeled units. Canyon Pointe is still covering the additional debt load from the reallocation from Midtown, Glen Willow and North Haven. The portfolio analysis now shows the 4 properties that support the single loan at First Bank separately from the rest of the Workforce properties. The subtotal represents the actual for all 4 properties combined and indicates a Debt Service Coverage Ratio of .97 for the loan. This is substantially affected by the rehab work currently underway at Arapahoe East. As each unit becomes vacant, we are completing modernization of the kitchens and bathrooms and installing new flooring. This extended vacancy is resulting in lower than budgeted rental income. Without this vacancy, the consolidated loan would be at approximately 1.10. Sanitas Place is operating in accordance with budget. improvements are not expected until the rehabilitation is completed in 2012. Red Oak Park achieved a 1.25 ratio in the month of July as we reached full occupancy. UPDATES: Moving to Work Status of contract: We received the draft contract from HUD late on August 31. We are reviewing the provisions and are in conversation with our counsel to determine if any changes need to be requested. We will have further information at the Board meeting. Resident meetings: With implementation coming up for January 1, 2012, staff has been conducting meetings at all eight of the public housing sites. Agenda topics at the on-site meetings have included MTW Year One rent changes, their impact on current residents and public housing conversion planning. The residents' response has been positive and 40-50% of the households who live at the sites have participated. Many of the Year One activities do not cause a huge impact on family households because we are changing rent structure for families in Year Two. Elderly and disabled households will feel a greater impact, however, because their rent change is effective in 2012. Their rent structure will shift from 30% of adjusted gross income to 26.5% of gross income. With the elimination of deductions for medical expenses, a hardship policy was created to address those incidences where the resident would experience more than a 7% increase in their portion of the rent. The hardship policy will cap the rent increase to 7% and will be closely monitored in Year One to determine if the activity needs to change. Those elderly and disabled residents who live at the family sites and who attended the meeting were appreciative of the new rent structure. Residents expressed hope that with triennial recertifcations, we could get Social Services and Social Security to move to such a system so as to avoid having to recertify every year with all the agencies. Meetings at Arapahoe Court, Walnut Place and Northport will take place the week of September 6. Meetings for the Section 8 voucher program participants are planned for the week of September 26. In October, we will hold a meeting for our community partners and landlords to inform them and gather input about our Year One activities. 4 We are creating factsheets for public housing residents, section 8 participants, landlords, and community partners. We will have the relevant sheets written, translated and distributed to the public housing family sites by mid-September. The factsheets will also be available at the front desk. A sample is provided as an attachment. Staff meetings: We hosted two staff presentations in August to do further education and outreach on what MTW truly means to BHP and what the impact for staff will be in the coming months. These sessions initiated many great comments and questions from staff. Overall, the mood is excited, with a touch of anxiety about the enormity of the public housing conversion. Occupancy Status and Net Rental Income The combined net rental income for all of BHP properties through July was $3,434,168 compared to a budgeted net rental income of $3,513,760 which is a negative variance to budget of $79,591 (-2.27%). The combined net rental income for all of the Tax Credit Properties through July was $1,347,921 compared to a budgeted net rental income of $1,314,778 which is a positive variance to budget of $37,143. (+2.83%) Several of BHP property groups were showing negative net rental income at the end of the July. The variances in Public Housing income are improving but still primarily due to a funding delay because of the federal budget process. The variances in Section 8 Project Based Properties are improving but still due to higher than normal vacancy at North Haven. The variance in the Workforce portfolio income is a result of a large number of vacancies at Bridgewalk and Arapahoe East and Hayden Place related to renovation. Staff has deliberately held units out of the rental pool for substantial rehabilitation at these three properties. This trend will continue through the fall as we start taking approximately 20 ,µnitc rner mnn#h Tiff line nt Bridge.xralk for add:t:onal rehab over next 6 months. The BHP year-to-date occupancy through July was 96.96%, compared to a budgeted occupancy rate of 97%. The combined physical occupancy rate for the Tax Credit portfolio year-to-date through July was 98.84%, compared to a budgeted occupancy of 97%. The chart below shows physical occupancy by property type. These property designations mirror the way the budget is organized. Public Housing has been divided into two groups of less than 250 units each, to comply with HUD Project Based Accounting requirements. Public Housing I is comprised of all the family sites and Public Housing II is comprised of the two senior sites. Public Housing I properties - Arapahoe, Diagonal, Iris/Hawthorne, Kalmia, Madison and Manhattan. -188 units Public Housing II properties -Northport and Walnut Place - 145 Units Project Based Section 8 Properties - Canyon Point, Glen Willow & North Haven - 124 Work Force - 101 Pearl, Arapahoe East, Bridgewalk, Dakota Ridge, Eden East, Hayden Place, Midtown, Orchard House, Sanitas Place, Twin Pines, Whittier and Woodlands- 272 Tax Credit properties - Broadway East, Broadway West, Foothills Community, Holiday Neighborhood, and Red Oak Park, Vistoso 267 units 5 Z~ Total units combined - 995 July 2011 Net Rental Net Rental Net Rental Physical Physical Variance Income - Income - Income - Occ Occ to YTD Budget Variance YTD Budget Budget Public $633,602 $646,390 ($12,70$) 98.47% 97% 1.47% Housing - I Public $399,881 $419,264 ($11,383) 97.76% 97% 0.76°!0 Housing - II PB Sec. $ $731,124 $733,726 ($2,642) 98.28% 97/ 1.28% properties Work Force $1,651,052 $1,701,939 ($50,887) 92.69% 97% -4.31% BHP portfolio $3,434,168 $3,513,760 ($79,591) 96.96% 97% -0.04% combined Broadway East $306,396 $291,665 $14,731 98.47% 97°l0 1.47% Broadway $148,532 $145,930 $2,602 98.39% 97% 1.39% West Foothills $538,290 $521,537 $16,753 99.90% 97% 2.90% Holiday $273,209 $270,638 $2,571 98.51% 97% 1.5100 Vistoso $81,494 $81,008 $486 97.21% 97% 0.21% TC portfolio $1,347,921 $1,310,778 $37,143 98.84% 97% 1.84% combined Utility Update At the July meeting, Commissioners expressed an interest in some additional data on BH P's utility costs as background for our energy reduction efforts. The following two tables summarize the information, which is provided in narrative below. Properties Where BHP Properties Where BHP 2010 Utility Data Pays Only Common Pays Both Electricity & Total Expenses Area Utilities Gas Electricit expenses $34,148 $172,909 $207,057 Gas expenses $75,304 $112,641 $187,946 TOTAL $109,452 $285,550 $395,003 BHP Utility Payment for Properties: BHP Pays All Electricity & BHP Pays Common Area Electricity Gas 6 Arapahoe Court Arapahoe East' Iris - Hawthorn Canyon Point Bridgewalk Midtown Glen Willow Broadway East' North Haven Kahnia Broadway West Red Oak Park Madison Dakota Ridge Sanitas Place Manhattan Diagonal Court Twin Pines Northport Foothills Vistoso Walnut Place Hayden Place Whittier Apartments High Mar 101 Pearl Holiday In 2010, BHP paid a total of $207,057 for electricity; $185,545 of which was spent at our 21 non- tax credit properties and $21,511 to cover common area expenses at our tax credit properties. Of these 21 properties, BHP pays all the electricity for eight properties and pays only common area electricity for the remaining 13. About 93% of the total electricity cost (about $173k) is devoted to paying the electricity for the eight properties where all electricity (and gas) is paid by BHP. These properties include: Arapahoe Court, Kalmia, Madison, Manhattan, Northport, Walnut Place, Canyon Pointe, and Glen Willow. As for gas costs, BHP paid a total of $187,946 for service in 2010. Of this, over $ l 04k (58%) was devoted to the 10 properties where BHP pays gas (note this includes Arapahoe East & Broadway West). In 2011 year to date, BHP is 10% under budget for our utility line item. We believe this is primarily attributed to the Energy Performance Contract, completed early this year. In numeric terms we are $74,000 ahead of budget, $35,000 for gas, $7,000 for electricity, and the remainder for water, sewer and trash. Broadway West Solar BHP has been working diligently for several months to arrange a power purchase agreement (PPA) to put solar on our Broadway West property. Lighthouse Solar has worked with us to negotiate a PPA contract where BHP would purchase solar energy from Lighthouse Solar, the farm that would own and operate the solar installation on Broadway West's roof. BHP plans to use City grant money and Xcel solar rebates to leverage a PPA agreement that will result in paying a utility rate for solar energy that would be much lower per kilowatt hour (kWh) than energy from Xcel, the current utility provider. The cheaper solar energy will help to offset the common area electricity expenses, thereby lowering our operating expenses for this property. The PPA partnership structure will allow for BHP to have a larger solar array installed and to offset a greater portion of common area expenses than if BHP chooses to directly purchase a solar array at Broadway West using only the grant funds. If at any point in the contract (starting at year six) BHP wants to purchase the solar array from Lighthouse there ' BHP also pays for all gas at these properties. z The contract requires that Lighthouse owns the solar for the first six years to allow for investor returns, however after six years the purchase price reflects the price of the depreciating asset. 7 is a buyout schedule. Also, terminating the contract (e.g. removing solar from Broadway West's roof) is another option, but is not recommended given the high costs associated with this option. There are a few hurdles to completing this project. The solar rebates we plan to use for this project are set to expire in September 2011 and we do not yet have approval from our LIHTC investor to amend the Partnership Agreement to include this project. We have requested an extension from Xcel, and will continue to pursue the project. If we are unable to get the needed extension, we will work with the City or, other buildings 1vhere we could possibly use the grant. Bridgewalk Update The refinancing of Bridgewalk was completed in July with Wells Fargo. The total amount of the financing is $14,000,000. We have completed one draw with Wells Fargo and all is moving along smoothly. Phase 2 renovation work at Bridgewalk is complete. Work for this phase included paving of the entire site, re-grading and structural repairs to correct negative drainage, exterior lighting repairs, and extensive landscape repairs including new irrigation and new sod, and a new playground. The site looks incredible and we are pleased with the outcome of the work. The contract for Phase 3 renovation work at Bridgewalk has been awarded to Palace Construction. Work will commence on September 19, 2011. Exterior work consists of next exterior siding, windows, roof replacements and stair renovations. Interior work consists of full renovation of the apartments including new kitchen cabinets and appliances, renovate , rl bathrooms harrlwnnrl flnnrg and new rnmetina ThP wnrlr mill he rnnriiirtrrl in _z,. six phases with residents relocating for approximately 30 days. Work is scheduled to be complete by the end of March 2012. A few pictures from the completed Phase 2: 8 Z7 ~ .?4~ ~ 7~; r ~ ~ e~ ~ ~c' « ~ l-t4~ ,+'yi aS. ~ k . s-;~ Tyr s~ _'z F.. ~r 9 z8 x s :h t; x. i m _ I.z w Y - Zil i~ +,P 10 z1J W T" o r. . 1 t r y rays, ! p d` o 2011 CDBG/CHAP Renovation Work Early this year BHP was awarded $1.2 million in grant funds from the city of Boulder to make capital improvements at Arapahoe East, Hayden Place, and Sanitas Place. Arapahoe East Last year we completed a full exterior renovation of Arapahoe East. This year we have renovated intwrrinre of eicrlht of the 11 anartmpntc, The interinrc lnnk a nt with nmw kitchens, bathrooms, flooring and paint. The completed units have been leasing quickly at full rents. The remaining three units will be renovated by the end of 2011. 11 r t t n n 'i j I nca Hayden Place We will begin full interior renovations of the Hayden Place apartments starting on September 7. We will rotate our existing contractors through the units and finish the proie.rt by the end of October. ResirI ntc txrill Iu- relocated Fnr allolt 10 dacre yv'k;la tl,A,r J apartment is completed. Sanitas Place BHP hired 4z Architecture and Milender White Construction to complete a design build renovation for Sanitas Place. We have an initial concept for re-working the site. Construction will start in the fall and be complete by the end of the year. We are focusing on livability, exterior curb appeal and energy efficiency. 2012 CDBG/CHAP Grant Request BHP has requested $1.6 million for renovation work at Whittier, Twin Pines, Midtown, and Dakota Ridge. We will present to the Technical Review Group on this request on September 13th and should know more about the award by late fall. As with our request for 2011 funds, we have requested a large amount of funding with the promise that we will complete all necessary repairs, fund our reserve accounts for the properties, and improve our DSCR. With all of these property improvements, BHP would not request additional funds for a number of years under the assumption that these properties will now operate self-sufficiently. 12 3/ Canyon Pointe Management The Board may recall that eleven residents have organized a group that reached out to the Board for help with their complaints about management. Commissioners McCormick and Klerman responded for the Board and communicated that the group should use the established complaint policy for BHP which includes meeting with the Executive Director. To date, the group remains active and unhappy and appears to be challenging BHP's authority to manage the building. Yet, the group has been unwilling to meet with Betsey. The next step is to continue to engage with this group and encourage them to meet with her so that we can better understand their issues. 13 is Boulder HousingHOVING Partners FACTSWEET: OVERVIEW WHAT IS "MOVING TO WORK". WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR YOU AS A... In Marsh 2.(1 11 Boulder Nni3cina Partners (BHP) was ! RESIDENT? selected as one of 35 agencies nationwide to participate BHP will offer new and existing housing participants in the Moving to Work (MtW) Demonstration Program and residents a more streamlined process to receive through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban housing assistance, an increase in housing choices, and Development (HUD). BHP is honored and excited to additional services to assist them in becoming more be a part of this elite program. The three primary goals self-sufficient. BHP will be undertaking extensive of the program are to: renovation of our public housing assets, which will 1. Use federal dollars more effectively mean residents will experience some disruption from 2. Create incentives for families to work, seek work or construction, as well as the benefits of fully renovated prepare for work sites. 3. Increase housing choices for low-income households LANDLORD PARTICIPATING IN THE SECTION 8 PROGRAM? WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR BHP? BHP will be able to ease some ofthe rules and regulations BHP has been given the authority and flexibility to that burden our landlords while still working to provide develop policies and procedures outside the limitations high-quality living standards for our residents. of certain HUD regulations. As an MtW agency, BHP COMMUNITY PARTNER? will be able to transform the way we provide housing BHP will be able to use new resources to strengthen and assistance to better meet the needs of our families our current partnerships and create new partnerships and our community. to provide services and nrngrams. for Our residents and Examples of what BHP can do include: community. • Creating more affordable housing units through QUESTIONS? construction or acquisition; and Additional information about MtW and the changes at • Preserving and renovating our current public BHP can be found on our vvebsite at: housing communities; and NN,c,,,-~v.bolilderhousingpartners.org or if you have • Providing more services for our questions about BHP's Moving to r _ residents and participants; and Work program, please contact: wren Kreutzberg • Piloting a rent policy that will 720-564-4631, encourage resident self- f µ Kreutzbergk@ sufficiency, reduce fraud, and boulderhousingpartners.org keep rents affordable. Boulder OUR MISSION Our primary mission is to provide quality, affordable housing, developed and M10010- im Houslin9 Il® managed with respect for the dignity of all involved. We also seek to create a MIMI Partners sense of community strength and spirit that supports resident efforts to realize Providing Homes, Creating Community, Changing Lives success in their lives. 33 BHP Statement of Activities July 31, 2011 YTD YTD Ref Actual Budget Variance $ % Var REVENUE Operations Revenue Tenant Dwelling Rental A $ 2,713,177 $ 2,781,965 $ (68,788) -2.5% Non Dwelling Rental Income 7,354 7,190 164 23% Rental Write-offs B (34,832) (15,533) (19,299) 124.2% HUD-Operating Subsidy 267,634 286,930 (19,296) -6.7% HAP Project Based Assistance 446,649 453,208 (6,599) -1.5% Total Operations Revenue 3,399,942 3,513,760 (113,818) -3.2% Fee Revenue Asset Fee Revenue 50,940 50,960 (20) 0.0% Property Mgmt & Bkkpg Fee 327,175 327,369 (194) -0.1% Development Fees C1 133,396 49,900 83,496 167.3% Mgmt Fees - Tax Credits & S8 202,184 199,555 2,629 1.3% Total Res Svc Fee Income C2 187,330 127,713 59,617 46.7% Total Fee Revenue C 901,025 755,497 145,528 19.3% Grants and Subsidies HCV-HAP Revenue 4,078,372 4,045,234 33,138 0.8% Non Federal Grants and Donations 564,753 565,000 (247) 0.0% Federal Capital Grants D 446,178 692,307 (246,129) -35.6% Federal Service Grants 219,605 273,039 (53,434) -19.6% Total Grants and Subsidies 5,308,908 5,575,580 (266,672) -4.8% Other Revenue Tenant Late Fees 12,429 10,251 2,178 21.2% Tenant Work Order Charges 7,020 7,735 (715) -9.2% Tenant Reim - Utilities 37,734 25,782 11,952 46.4% Interest Income 363,656 338,396 25,259 7.5% Total Laundry -38,5655, 39,795 (1,9 zm -3.1 % Community Center Revenue 2,100 3,353 (1,253) -37.4% Maint Charges to Prop 616,711 638,750 (22,040) -3.5% Miscellaneous Revenue E 220,117 16,350 203,767 1246.3% Total Other Revenue 1,298,331 1,080,412 217,919 20.2% Total Revenue 10,908,206 10,925,249 (17,043) -0.21/6 EXPENSES Salaries and Benefits Total Salaries 2,112,600 2,195,697 83,097 3.8% Total Salaries and Benefits 2,112,600 2,195,697 83,097 3.8%a Property Costs Capital Improvement Grant Mgmt. Fees C3 103,396 0 (103,396) -100.0% Management Fees 110,090 113,253 3,164 2.8% Maintenance Materials 134,186 149,308 15,122 10.1% Contract Labor & Repairs 391,545 471,884 80,339 17.0% BHP Contract Labor 502,597 503,650 1,053 0.2% Extraordinary Maintenance F 219,109 72,750 (146,359) --201.2% Garbage and Trash Removal 77,472 66,955 (10,517) -157% Water and Sewer G 112,060 165,133 53,073 32.1% Electricity 103,526 108,430 4,904 4.5% Gas H 119,054 142,441 23,387 16.4% PILOT 63,843 57,820 (6,023) -10.4% HOA Fees 4,940 2,713 (2,228) -82,1% Selling Expenses 1 20,096 0 (20,096) -100.0% 1 of 2 9171201110:55 AM / ~7 BHP Statement of Activities July 31, 2011 YTD YTD Ref Actual Budget Variance $ % Var Total Property Costs 1,961,912 1,854,337 (107,575) -5.8% Operating Expenses Amortization Expense J 1,28,830 17,815 (111,015) -623.2% Asset Management Fee 50,940 50,960 20 0.0% Audit Fees 27,853 27,853 (0) 0.0% Background Checks 5,825 5,258 (567) -10.8% Bank Fees 3,997 3,710 (287) -7.7% Board Expense 3,786 2,797 (989) -35.4% Community Center Exp 770 770 0 0.0% Consultants 3,686 30,341 26,655 87.9% Depreciation 814,046 924,650 110,604 12.0% Dues and Fees 21,738 28,695 6,957 24.2% Expendable Equipment 7,390 18,431 11,041 59.9% HCV-HAP Expense K 3,430,320 3,689,875 259,555 7.0% Insurance Expense 109,328 117,740 8,412 7.1% Interest Expense 2,672 4,900 2,228 45.5% Legal Expense 15,003 8,629 (6,374) -73.9% Mileage 4,873 6,589 1,716 26.0% Miscellaneous - Expense 9,569 15,012 5,442 36.3% Mortgage Interest Expense 614,719 598,253 (16,466) -2.8% Non-Salaried Personnel 23,156 26,900 3,744 13.9% Advertising/Marketing 14,668 7,499 (7,169) -95.6% Office Supplies 21,163 18,935 (2,228) -11.8% Phone Expense 30,413 35,742 5,329 14.9% Postage Expense 9,764 8,260 (1,504) -18.2% Printing Expense 17,108 18,900 1,792 9.5% Property Mgmt & Bkkpg Fee Exp 327,175 327,404 229 0.1% Publications - 480 480 100.0% Resident Relocation 1,865 - (1,865) -100.0% Res Svc/Strateaic Plannina Fee Exp 119;168 119;616 448 n.4% Staff Training 28,113 46,764 18,651 39.9% Service Grant Expense C4 231,066 204,411 (26,656) -13.0% Vehicle Expense 35,292 35,035 (257) -0.7% RRC Allocation 3,253 4,844 1,591 32.8% Total Operating Costs 6,117,552 6,407,068 289,515 4.5% Total Expenses 10,192,065 10,457,102 265,037 2.5% Net Income before Other Items 716,141 468,147 247,994 53.0% Gain (Lass) on Disposition of Property L 487,523 - 487,523 100.0% Extraordinary Income (Expense) M 416,901 326,901 90,000 0.0% TOTAL NET INCOME (LOSS) $ 1,620,565 $ 795,048 $ 825,517 103.8% Note: Full year budget was adjusted by moving $715,000 from Federal Capital Grants to Non Federal Grants and Donations to reflect City of Boulder money designated from CHAP rather than CDBG as anticipated. No net effect on budget. 2 of 2 9x7/201110:56 AM BHP Balance Sheet July 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 Actual Actual Net Change Ref July-11 December-10 YTD ASSETS Current Assets Unrestricted Cash and Cash Equivalents N $ 2,470,786 $ 2,068,356 $ 402,430 Reserved Cash - Replacements 722,980 731,270 (8,290) Accounts Receivable O 453,440 1,270,709 (817,269) Accounts Receivable-Tax Credits 29,892 108,187 (78,295) Prepaid Expenses 42,831 71,121 (28.290) Supplies-Inventory 26,647 24,331 2,316 Total Current Assets 3,746,577 4,273,974 (527,3971 Restricted Cash Restricted Cash - Other 131 650,257 1,791,724 (1,141,467) Restricted Cash - Section 8 1,046,435 721,195 325,240 Restricted Cash - Tenant Security Deposits 388,329 388,795 (466) Total Restricted Cash 2,085,021 2,901,714 (816,693) Capital Assets Constriction in Progress 4,498,110 4,493,040 5,070 Furniture Fixtures and Equipment 541,594 465,941 75,653 Real Estate Assets-Land and Buildings P2 53,644,424 51,042,321 2,602,103 Less: Accum Depreciation Real Estate Assets (28,957,796) (28,334,063) (623,733) Total Capital Assets 29,726,332 27,667,239 2,059,093 Other Assets Notes Receivable 10,125,767 9,757,205 368,562 Interest Receivable Notes 3,077,153 3,222,076 (144,923) Partnership Investments 432,625 432,625 (0) Net Amortized Costs 694,327 853,683 (159,356) Total Other Assets 14,329,871 14,265,589 64,282 TOTAL ASSETS $ 49,887,801 $ 49,108,516 $ 779,285 LIABILITIES & EQUITY LIABILITIES Current Liabilities Accounts Payable Q $ 230,246 $ 1,033,946 $ 803,700 Accrued Payroll 69,521 66,922 (2,599) Accrued Payroll Taxes Payable 26,893 26,626 (267) Accrued Compensated Absences 263,765 254,754 (9,011) Other Accrued Expenses 266,521 346,383 79,862 Deterred Revenue 26,500 283,665 257,165 Current Portion of Long Term Debt R1 285,649 5,406,271 5,120,622 Prepaid Rent 30,432 12,683 (17,749) Security Deposits 393,347 389,365 (3,982) Total Current Liabilities 1,592,874 7,820,615 6,227,741 Long-Term Liabilities Notes Payable 99,171 351,171 252,000 Accrued Interest Payable 12,472 80,070 67,598 Mortgages Payable R2 19,745,610 13,984,068 (5,761,542) Bands Payable 1,508,903 1,564,386 55,483 Total Long-Term Liabilities 21,366,156 15,979,695 (5,386,461) TOTAL LIABILITIES 22,959,030 23,800,310 841,280 EQUITY Total Equity 26,928,771 25,308,206 (1,620,565) TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY $ 49,867,801 $ 49,108,516 $ (779,285) 1 of 1 917201110:56 AM 3~ BHP Statement of Cash Flows for the Month and Year to Date Ending July 31, 2011 Ref Month to Date Year to Date Reconciliation of Net income to Net Cash Provided (Used) by Operating Activities Net Income (Deficit) $ 143,622 $ 1,620,565 Adjustments to Reconcile Net Income to Net Cash Provided (Used) by Operating Activities Increase (Decrease) Accum Deprec/Amort 126,379 783,089 (increase) Decrease in Accounts Receivable T1 23,471 895,564 (increase) Decrease in Prepaid Expenses (1,947) 28,290 Increase (Decrease) in Prepaid Rent and Security Deposits 1,542 21,731 (Increase) Decrease in Supplies/inventory 223 (2,316) (Increase) Decrease in Reserved Cash (46,342) 8,290 (Increase) Decrease in Restricted Cash U1 (45,197) 816,693 Increase (Decrease) in Payables and Accrued Expenses T2 (69,331) (871,685) increase (Decrease) in Deferred Revenue (152,607) (257,165) Total Adjustments (163,810) 1,422,491 Net Cash Provided (Used) by Operating Activities (20,187) 3,043,056 Cash Flows from Investing Activities (increase) Decrease in Construction in Progress (296,778) (5,070) (Increase) Decrease in Furniture Fixtures and Equipment (31,288) (75,653) (Increase) Decrease in Real Estate Assets U2 (177,010) (2,602,103) (Increase) Decrease in Notes and Interest Receivable 24,229 (223,638) Net Cash Provided (Used) by Investing Activities (480,846) (2,906,466) Cash Flows from Financing Activities Increase (Decrease) in Current Portion of Long Term Debt (5,031,652) (5,120,622) Increase (Decrease) in Notes Payable 0 (252,000) Increase (Decrease) in Mortgages and Bonds Payable 5,301,147 5,638,461 Net Cash Provided (Used) by Financing Activities 269,495 265,839 Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents S (231,540) 402,430 Unrestricted Cash and Cash Equivalents - Beginning 2,702,326 2,068,356 Unrestricted Cash and Cash Equivalents - Ending $ 2,470,786 $ 2,470,786 1 of 1 9/71201110:56 AM 38 BoulderHou"snay'€ters '"Po olxo'Andt sis 2011 Months in 7 Annualized Adjusted Adfusted PUPA PUPA PUPA PUPA Property Address Units DSCR EGI OPEX NOI Debt, - YTD Arapahoe Court 951,953 Arapahoe 14 $ 5,093 $ (7,308) $ (2,215) $ - - Diagonal Court 3265-3273 30th St. 30 $ 6,042 $ (5,214) $ 828 $ - - Iris Hawthorne 1650-1690 Iris Ave. 14 $ 6,294 $ (6,048) $ 246 $ - - Kalmia 13500 Nottingham 53 $ 6,623 $ (6,065) $ 563 $ - - Madison 1130-119035th St. 33 $ 5,758 $ (6,146) $ (387) $ - - Manhattan 660-690 Manhattan 43 $ 5,445 $ (6,329) $ 884 $ - - Public Housing I Sub Total: 187 $ 5,969 $ 16,095 $ 127) Northport 1133 Portland Place 50 $ 4,862 $ (5,391) $ (529) $ - - Walnut Place 11940 Walnut Place 95 $ 7,559 $ (4,937) $ 2,622 $ - - Public Housing 11 Sub Total: 145 $ 6,629 $ 5,093 $ 1,635 Canyon Pointe 700 Walnut 82 $ 9,732 $ (5,243) $ 4,489 $ 3,915 1.15 Glen Willow 301-333 Pearl St. 34 $ 10,813 $ (7,541) $ 3,271 $ - - North Haven 2550 9th St. 8 $ 11,766 $ 8,296) $ 3,470 $ - - Project Based Sub Total: 124 $ 10,160 $ 6,070 $ 4,090 $ 2,589 1.58 Arapatioi? East , 4610Rrapahoe; . t` 1.1" 532} $ 989 $'•3,631 0:27 Tt Dakota Rtdge? 4900 10th St. 13 ? $ 13,170 $ (4 187) $ 8,984" $ 7,643 1.18 TL Sanitas Placei 3640 Broadway 12" $ 244:':'$ (4,666) $ 3,579 $ „4,498 0.80 TL Twin Pines" 1700 22nd St. 22 ~8,71x2..$ : -4,261" : ,3635 1.17 TL TL Sub Total. 58 $ 9,385 $ (4,827) $ 4,558 $ 4,711 0.97 101 Pearl 101 Pearl 6 $ 13,454 $ (4,876) $ 8,578 $ - - Bridgewalk 602-698 Walden Circle 123 $ 11,488 $ (4,413) $ 7,075 $ 4,664 1.52 Hyelen place.` 34th &Ha "den Plae 24 $ ;8 ©74 $ (6085- . ;f,9$6 3 63,. • p,51J Midtown 83720th St. 13 $ 9,342 $ (4,623) $ 4,719 $ - - Orchard House 1 $ 67 $ (5,172) $ (5,105) $ - - Whittier 1946 Walnut St 10 $ 9,387 $ (5,667) $ 3,719 $ 3,113 1.19 Woodlands 2600 Block of Mapleton 35 $ 13,694 $ (7,621) $ 6,072 $ 3,405 1.78 Workforce Sub Total: 269 $ 10,879 $ 5,136 $ 5,743 $ 4,053 1.42 Portfolio Totals: 725 $ 8,639 $ (5,535) $ 3,105 $ 1,946 1.60 2011 ~tx:Credxi 7?ro ertlesz.: Address Units PUPA PUPA PUPA Adjusted p EGI (,O EY NOI DeFif« :r DSCR Broadway East 3160 Broadway 44 $ 12,403 $ (5,478) $ 6,925 $ 3,330 2.08 Red Oak Park" 27th & Valmont 59 $ 9,724 $ (4,905) $ 4,819 $ 3,857 1.25 Foothills 4500 block of 7thl8th 74 $ 12,629 $ (3,994) $ 8,635 $ 6,385 1.35 Holiday 1500 Lee Hill 49 $ 9,775 $ (4,463) $ 5,312 $ 3,629 1.46 Vistoso 4500 Baseline 15 $ 9,730 $ (5,932) $ 3,798 $ 2,768 1.37 Broadway West 13120 Broadway 26 $ 10,348 $ (5,013) $ 5,335 $ 3,232 1.65 Tax Credit Sub Total 267 $ 11,041 $ 4,734 $ 6,307 $ 4,307 1.46 *Red Oak Park numbers annualized as of July 2011 when full lease-up Properties in Transition Address occurred and operations where stabilized Bluff Street 2232 Bluff St. Index of terms BMMIRed Oak Park 27th & Valmont PUPA - Per Unit Per Annum Orchard House 1603 Orchard St. EGI - Effective Gross Income = (Total Revenue - Grant Revenue) Op Ex - Operating Expenses = (Total Expenses-Capital Expenses-Extraordinary Maintenance and Non-Op Ex) NOI - Net Operating Income = (Net Income + Non OpEx) DSCR - Debt Service Coverage Ratio = NOI/Debt ADJUSTED - For Capital Grants, Capital Exp. and Extrodinary Maint. G Boulder Housing Partners Cash Report July &June 2011 CASH NEEDED FOR OPERATIONS AND RESERVES Jul-11 Jun-11 Change Cash Needed for Day-to-Day Operations $ 750,000.00 $ 750,000.00 $ - Development Working Capital $ 250,000.00 $ 250,000.00 $ - Restricted Cash BMM Loan/Foothills $ 215,340.96 $ 164,762.40 $ 50,578.56 Reserve for Capital Replacements - Woodlands $ 600,000.00 $ 600,000.00 $ - Reserve for Capital Replacements - General $ 600,000.00 $ 600,000.00 $ - 4800 Broadway Reserve $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00 $ - Landscaping Escrow - Set Aside $ 72,864.71 $ 72,871.62 $ (6.91) Total cash needed $ 2,558,205.67 $ 2,507,634.02 $ 50,571.65 Total Unrestricted Cash Available for Operations $ 1,254,990.44 $ 1,355,018.54 $ (100,028.10) Restricted Cash for ROPJFoothills $ 215,340.96 $ 164,762.40 $ 50,578.56 Unrestricted Cash Targeted for Woodlands Rehab $ 495,544.86 $ 453,774,87 $ 41,769.99 Unrestricted Cash Available for Replacements $ 316,431.52 $ 306,457.39 $ 9,974.13 Development Funds Set Aside (Landscaping Escrow) $ 72,864.71 $ 72,871.62 $ (6.91) Total Cash available for Operations, Replacement and Set Asides $ 2,355,172,49 $ 2,352,884.82 $ 2,287.67 Overage (Shortage) $ (203,033.18) $ (154,749.20) $ (48,283.98) IMPACT., We continue to run short of the Board designated targets for operations and reserves. The impact is that rehabilitation projects may be delayed and that BHP does not have the ability to fund development projects or to take advantage of acquisition opportunities with cash reserves. CASH NEEDED FOR PUBLIC HOUSING AND PROJECT BASED PROPERTIES Jul-11 Jun-11 Change E/AM, Restricted Cash - Public Housing & Project Based - Target $ 650,000.00 $ 650,000.00 $ - Restricted FSS Escrow $ 6,624.71 $ 5,631.71 $ 993.00 Restricted Cash - Public Housing & Project Based - Actual $ 981,905.49 1 1,096,210.16 $ (114,304.67) Total PH and Project Based Cash _ $ 988,530.20 $ 1,101,842.87 $ (113,311.67) Overage (Shortage) $ 338,530.20 $ 451,841,87 $ (114,304,67) IMPACT: The unrestricted Public Housing and Project Based money cannot be borrowed for COCC Operations and has therefore been split from the Unrestricted Operating Cash. This money is available to fund operations for PH and PB portfolios. In August BHP will settle the intercompany from 2007 which will reduce the PH cash and increase unrestricted cash balance by approx. $293,000 CASH NEEDED FOR SECTION 8 Jul-11 Jun-11 Change Cash Needed for 1 month of HAP and Admin - Target $ 525,000.00 $ 525,000.00 $ - Restricted Cash Available for Section 8 Operations - Actual $ 359,452.57 $ 370,886.10 $ (11,433.53) Restricted Funds Available for Use on HAP and FSS escrow $ 1,079,612.88 $ 971,594.54 $ 108,018.34 Total Section 8 Cash $ 1,439,065.45 $ 1,342,480.64 $ 96,584.81 Overage (Shortage) $ 914,065.45 $ 817,480.64 $ 96,584.81 IMPACT, Currently reserve is funded - If HUD were to slow down their payments, BHP would have funds to cover the shortfall for one month - This has been building due to full funding received for the 181 new vouchers which are still in the lease-up process. $300,000 Line of Credit Terms: If drawn on, terms are interest only variable rate of approx 5%, payment in full due November 2011 A/0 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Commissioners FROM: Betsey Martens, Executive Director Stuart Grogan, Director of Development Shannon Cox Baker, Project Manager Kevin Knapp, Project Manager Liz Wolfert, Project Assistant Lindsey Moss, Project Assistant SUBJECT: Development Report DATE: September 7, 2011 This month's development report includes: Consent: None at this time Action/Discussion: Public Housing Conversion: Private Activity Bonds Lee Hill Updates: High Mar Red Oak Park Project Tracking Form and Timeline Attachments: Public Housing Conversion: Private Activity Bond Resolution #12 Assignment Agreement Delegation Agreement Project Tracking Form and Timeline CONSENT ITEMS None at this time ~1 ACTION/ DISCUSSION ITEMS PUBLIC HOUSING CONVERSION Previous Board Meeting: This item is being introduced to the Board at this meeting. Progress since Previous Board Meeting: Project Summary: For the past several months, the development team has begun the process of planning for the conversion and rehabilitation of all the public housing sites as part of the Moving to Work activities. The first step toward rehabilitating and restructuring our public housing is to request "disposition" of our eight public housing sites out of the Public Housing program. "Disposition" in this context means HUD's review and approval to withdraw its oversight from these properties by releasing its Declarations of Trust pursuant to our application. Conversion to more conventional financing and retention as affordable housing, sale, and demolition of public housing are options permitted by HUD that other housing authorities have undertaken with their own public housing. In our application, we will indicate our intention to convert it to a more financially-viable operating structure by substantially rehabilitating the units. This is the same model we successfully used to convert, refinance, and rehabilitate the 44 units at our Broadway East property. Currently, BHP intends to submit one application for all eight of the public housing sites disposition. This creates some efficiency in the application process and gets HUD approval under the current requirements. BHP would convert each property, in several phases, over two to five years as needed. The units remain as public housing until HUD releases its Declaration of Trust coincident with the conversion to another form of financing like a conventional loan or a low income housing tax credit partnership. We are currently working to determine the optimal phasing for the conversion of the sites to avoid any loss of funds to our baseline MTW funding calculations which includes the Tenant Protection, or relocation, vouchers, the Replacement Housing Factor Funds and the Asset Repositioning Fee. Further, only the tenants that are resident at the time of disposition are eligible for vouchers. Understanding the timing of when residents would receive this support and how it might impact vacancy rates and rental income between approval of the conversion and beginning construction is an important issue staff is currently researching. ~{L BHP has actively invested in these units over the years and has tracked its work addressing outstanding capital improvements. A lot of the work was based on Capital Needs Assessments (CNA) done in 2007. One of the requirements of the LIHTC program is that our rehabilitation plan is based on a current CNA The final scope of the rehabilitation will be determined following a third party Capital Needs Assessment that will be completed in the early part of 2012, but will likely include roofs, heating and cooling systems, insulation, replacement windows and doors, flooring, bathrooms and kitchens in addition to repairs and replacements to parking lots, landscaping and any site work. Where possible, all rellUllltatiVll YY111 rlilprOVe the P-10P rtle s' environmental sustainability. In addition, we will add community centers, by converting approximately two units, at the Kalmia, Madison, and Manhattan and Diagonal Court sites. We expect to submit the HUD application before the end of 2011. We anticipate it will take HUD a few months to review the application before they issue their decision. We expect to hear back from them in April or May, 2012. During this time we will be completing all of the due diligence and preconstruction tasks. We will procure a new capital needs assessment, a general contractor/design team, financing partnerships, and other needed consultants for the predevelopment process. Some sites will have to go through a site review or other zoning process for a few of the rehabilitations as well as for the new community centers. We anticipate the first phase of construction to begin over the fall of 2012. Private Activity Bonds: Every year, the City of Boulder is allocated the authority to issue Private Activity Bonds (PAB) to support the private sector implementation of governmental programs and goals such as affordable housing and community development. Each year the City may reserve its PAB allocation, approximately $4.5 million annually, for specific projects, assign the authority to another entity for a project, or let it revert to the State pool. If the City reserves or assigns its allocation, it remains viable for three years. If bonds are not issued, the authority expires with no consequence or cost to the City of Boulder or an assignee. In order to begin implementation of the public housing conversion component of the Moving To Work (MTW) initiative, BHP requested that the City delegate, and assign, respectively its 2009 and 2011 PAB allocation to BHP. Use of the PABs by a private sector sponsor, the LIHTC partnership, allows that entity to borrow money at tax exempt rates. The bonds would be issued by BHP on behalf of the LIHTC partnership which would have the sole responsibility for paying the principal and interest on the debt. There would be no recourse to BHP or to the City of Boulder. These bonds are not long term obligations of the City or its tax payers. We have requested assignment of the City's 2011 PAB allocation of $4,854,975 because that allocation has not been reserved from the State pool. We have requested delegation of the City's 2009 PAB allocation, $4,461,300, because the City has already reserved these funds for multi- family housing in order to preserve them for the three year period. BHP intends to issue the first portion of the PABs before the end of 2012 and the remainder in 2013. Further, BHP has advised the City of its intent to request the use of its 2012 authority as well for the MTW initiative. We would combine the PAB allocation with 4% non-competitive, low income housing tax credits (LIHTC) for the rehabilitation of the eight public housing sites identified in the MTW application. While not as powerful as the 9% LIHTCs typically used for new construction, these two strategies combined with the equity already present in the MTW sites makes a substantial rehabilitation possible. BHP used this strategy in addition to grants from the City and the St. John's Foundation to rehabilitate the Broadway East site. PxugUK 1 v, 2v i i, iii° City 0..~'il of the City of Bvuid°vr apprv v°vd a re~'vii.Itiv11 assigning and delegating its reserved and current PAB allocation to BHP. BHP and the City have executed the Delegation Agreement and Assignment Agreement, attached here to for your reference. Approval of the attached resolution would ratify these documents. We recommend that the Board approve the attached Resolution #12 which authorizes BHP's Executive Director to sign the agreements and to induce, or begin, the bond issuance process. Next steps: • Delivery of all executed forms to the State prior to September, 15, 2011; • Disposition of the public housing inventory; and • Draft application for 4% LIHTCs based on the CNA reports. ]LEE HILL HOUSING Previous Board Meeting: At the last meeting, we provided the following information: • The Boulder Shelter for the Homeless (Shelter) Board adopted the Guiding Principles and approved the Concept Plan for submittal to the City for review. They also offered both constructive comments and their support for the outreach process; • The project address is officially changed to 1175 Lee Hill Drive and the project's name is "1175 Lee Hill"; • An update on the land transfer from the Shelter to BHP; • The creation of 1175 Lee Hill, LLC of which BHP is the sole managing member. This entity will be BHP's proxy in the ownership of the Lee Hill parcel; • An update on the design process, including a preliminary schematic design cost estimate of $5 million with the goal of reducing it to $4.5 million; and • Intentions to submit a Conditional Use Review application to Planning staff on August 1, 2011. 77 Progress since Previous Board Meeting: Resident Eligibility: The success of our program at 1175 Lee Hill, for the residents, the neighbors and the community, will depend in large part on who is selected to live in the building. Therefore, the discussion about resident eligibility is a very important one. The discussion about eligibility is guided by the rules underlying the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program. HC-%T program mules are eodified. by every housing author; y in a document J ll b L Vl f in k 3V11 1 V called the Section 8 Administrative Plan (the Admin Plan). The Admin Plan is reviewed and approved annually, or as needed, by BHP's Board of Commissioners. The HCV rules, and the Admin Plan, dictate resident eligibility because the financing plan for Lee Hill involves project- basing HCVs for all of the units. As written, the HCV guidelines have historically precluded admission for chronically homeless customers because they often can't comply with the criminal background checks, and don't pass our regular screening for landlord and or personal references. In order to house chronically homeless individuals in a voucher funded property, changes to the Admin Plan for this project are recommended. We suggest that we take the discussion in two parts. At the September 12 meeting, we want your direction on eligibility decisions. Based on staff and community input, we'll return with amended plan language. It is important to note that our authority to waive provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations derives from our MTW status. The proposed changes will be reviewed by the community, the Board and HUD in that context as well as the public comment provisions of amending the Admin Plan. Once the many layers of review have been completed, we'll return with final language. The HCV program currently describes a number of causes for mandatory denial of assistance: HUD requires that we deny assistance in the following cases: • Any member of the household has been evicted from federally-assisted housing in the last five (5) years for drug-related criminal activity. 9 We determine that any household member is currently engaged in the use of illegal drugs or if we have reasonable cause to believe that any household member's current use or pattern of use of illegal drugs, or current abuse or pattern of abuse of alcohol, may threaten the health, safety, or right to peaceful enj oyment of the premises by other residents. • Any household member who has ever been convicted of drug-related criminal activity for the production or manufacture of methamphetamine on the premises of federally assisted housing • Any household member is subject to a lifetime registration requirement under a state sex offender registration program We recommend amendment to the Admin Plan as follows: 1. We propose that the Admin Plan maintain the provision of mandatory denial of admission to those individuals subject to lifetime registration on the sex offenders list. 2. We propose that the Admin Plan maintain the provision that persons who have been convicted of methamphetamine use be denied admission. 3. We propose that we identify that, under certain circumstances and following rigorous case review, residents at 1175 Lee Hill can be exempt from mandatory criminal provisions. In making decisions about exemptions to criminal history, we propose that there be a Shelter staff team that reviews each potential applicant. Following the Shelter's recommendations for admission, BHP will employ its normal compliance screening processes. The two staff teams will then make a final decision on all applicants. In our recommendation to maintain denial of admission for lifetime registrants and users of methamphetamine, we are recognizing the potential threat to the neighbors, the asset and fellow customers. However, there has been significant staff discussion about the treatment of sex offenders who are not required to register for their lifetime. A small minority of the chronically homeless population has sex offenses in their criminal history. Acknowledging the community sensitivity on the topic, it is generally agreed that the community is safer when sex offenders are housed and supervised, rather than homeless. BHP's current policy for the HCV program denies admission to anyone during the term of their registration, lifetime or otherwise, on the list. This is stricter than HUD's requirement. We want Board direction at this meeting on two options related to sex offenders at 1175 Lee Hill: I . Continue the current policy and require mandatory denial of admission to anyone registered as a sex offender; or 2. Assemble a panel of sex offender experts to assess the recidivism risk of eligible residents who are temporarily registered sex offenders and to provide a recommendation for residency at Lee Hill based on their assessment. If we opt to continue the current policy, then staff would recommend that we pilot a new policy for the Housing First program, which does not include 1175 Lee Hill Rd, in which an expert panel would be created to implement this idea and to test its ability to make safe and effective decisions. Neighborhood Outreach: The neighborhood outreach event is scheduled for 6-8 pm on Thursday, September 29, 2011. It will be held at the National Guard Armory in north Boulder. Notification postcards will be distributed to area residents no later than September 9, 2011. Area residents will be directed to the Lee Hill webpage on BHP's website for additional information, including a Project Fact Sheet. The outreach event will include a 30-minute project presentation (by Betsey, Shannon, and Mike Block - Housing First case manager at the Shelter), followed by a moderated questions and answer period and an open house. Shelter and BHP Board members are encouraged to attend. Entitlement Process: The Conditional Use Review application submittal has been postponed until after the land transfer between the Shelter and BHP is finalized and after the neighborhood outreach meeting. We anticipate finalizing the land transfer by mid-September. Next steps: Conduct neiglhborhood ou reach meeting: September I L 29, 7/01 1 1 1 • Apply for McKinney-Vento funding: October 1, 2011 • Submit Conditional Use Review application: October 3, 2011 • Complete design development (DD) set and DD cost estimate: October 31, 2011 UPDATE ITEMS HIGH MAR Previous Board Meeting: At the last meeting, we provided the following information: An update on the design and entitlement process, including submittal of a building permit application; and • Our intent to research and look for alternatives to finance the High Mar project sooner than the 9% tax credit program would permit given the County's current project in Lafayette. Progress since Previous Board Meeting: Design Process: The building application was submitted in late August. We anticipate approval by early November. Project Financing: As you know, the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (CHFA) denied BHP's 9% Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) application for High Mar during the March, 2011 application round. CHFA staff strongly advised us to postpone applying for 9% LIHTC equity until the March, 2013 application round in order to allow a competing affordable senior project in nearby Lafayette (Josephine Commons), to fully lease up. In an attempt to avoid the financial uncertainty of a two year construction delay and the subsequent negative impacts to our development pipeline, we began exploring financing the project with 4% LIHTC as an alternative. Initial 4% LIHTC modeling showed a $4 million gap in funding. Opportunities to fill the gap include various ways to increase income, decrease operating expenses, increase funding sources, and decrease project costs. We will continue to look at these alternatives and research the most feasible option and report back to the Board at a later meeting. 117 Next steps: Continue to conduct due diligence on the 4% LIHTC financing scenario. RED OAK PARK Pre.-.ou-s Board 1' eetin-: At the last meeting, we provided the following information: • A budget update at which point we had expended 83% of the project funds; • Receipt of Temporary Certificates of Occupancy for all 59 residential units; • A leasing update at which point we had 49 homes occupied; • An update on the solar systems that detailed Xcel's progress in installing half of the net meters; and • The announcement of the Grand Opening date. Progress since the Previous Board Meeting: Since the last meeting Red Oak Park has received a final Certificate of Occupancy from the City and the last unoccupied units were leased. Both the completion of construction and leasing activities occurred earlier than planned. We successfully celebrated both of these events at the grand opening festivities. Budget Update: Since the July Commissioners' meeting both the thirteenth and fourteenth draw requests have been approved by the lender. The project team has now begun to prepare the fifteenth and final draw request and the project will officially come in substantially under budget. Project savings will be allocated to a few remaining wish list items with the remainder coming back to the organization. Solar Update: Only the community center is now missing the net meter it needs to start producing energy. All other solar systems on site are operating as designed. The update from Xcel is that the community center meter has been ordered and should be installed within the month. Once the final meter has been installed and the system has been approved, we will submit verification of the installation of all PV systems to our tax credit investor for receipt of the solar tax credit equity payment. Post-Construction Activities: Now that construction has been completed the project staff has a list of items to complete to ensure tax credit compliance, the conversion of our debt from a construction loan to a permanent mortgage, and allow for the pay-in of tax credit equity from our investor. The conversion of our loan is scheduled to occur in January, 2012. This is when we will receive the tax credit equity to pay-down the construction loan and begin payments on our permanent mortgage. T8 Next steps: • Submit the final funding request to Key Bank; • Provide documentation of the operating solar systems to allow for the pay-in of the solar tax credits we sold to our investor; • Complete the final LIHTC application with CHFA; • Complete the bank's requirements to close the construction loan; and t f_ s tt, i ~L e T TT rro + •.omplete our tax credit investor's requiremienta for the pay-iii o1 Ui 1.111i equity. PROJECT TRACKING AND TIMELINE The following Development Division tracking tools, which are updated monthly, are attached to this memo: • Development Tracking Sheet • Project Benchmark Timeline ASSIGNMENT OF ALLOCATION This Assignment of Allocation (the "Assignment"), dated this day of 2011, is between the City of Boulder, Colorado (the "Assignor") and the Housing Authority of the City of Boulder, d/b/a/ Boulder Housing Partners, established pursuant to Section 29-4-201 et seq., C.R.S., a Colorado housing authority, (the "Assignee"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Assignor and the Assignee are authorized and empowered under the laws of the State of Colorado (the "State") to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of financing or refinancing multifamily residential rental projects for low- and moderate-income families located within the boundaries of the City; and WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), restricts the amount of tax-exempt bonds ("Private Activity Bonds") which may be issued in the State to provide such purposes (the "State Ceiling"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Code, the Colorado legislature adopted the Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act, Part 17 of Article 32 of Title 24, Colorado Revised Statutes (the "Allocation Act"), providing for the allocation of the State Ceiling among the Assignor and other governmental units in the State, and further providing for the assignment of a-11 +U- A I- A 11 ions Shill 611E ASSlgllol 60 Ul\J !"lsslg.Uee, ail" WHEREAS, pursuant to an allocation under Section 24-32-1706 of the Allocation Act, the Assignor has an allocation of the 2011 State Ceiling for the issuance of a specified principal amount of Private Activity Bonds prior to September 15, 2011 (the "2011 Allocation"); and WHEREAS, the Assignor has determined that, in order to finance or refinance multifamily residential rental projects for low- and moderate-income families located within the boundaries of the City in a manner consistent with the City's overall policies, it is necessary or desirable to provide for the utilization of all or a portion of the 2011 Allocation; and WHEREAS, the Assignor has determined that the 2011 Allocation, or a portion thereof, can be utilized most efficiently by assigning it to the Assignee to issue Private Activity Bonds for the purpose of providing funds to finance or refinance multifamily residential rental projects for low- and moderate-income families located within the boundaries of the City ("Revenue 6-0 Bonds"), and the Assignee has expressed its willingness to attempt to issue Revenue Bonds with respect to the 2011 Allocation; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the Assignor has determined to assign to the Assignee its 2011 Allocation of $4,854,975 for providing funds to finance or refinance multifamily residential rental projects for low- and moderate-income families located within the boundaries of the City, and the Assignee has agreed to accept such assignment, which is to be evidenced by this Assignment. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual promises hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The Assignor hereby assigns to the Assignee its 2011 Allocation of $4,854,975, subject to the terms and conditions contained herein. The Assignor represents that it has received no monetary consideration for said Assignment. 2. The Assignee hereby accepts the Assignment to it by the Assignor of Assignor's 2011 Allocation of $4,854,975, subject to the terms and conditions contained herein. The Assignee agrees to use its best efforts to issue and sell Revenue Bonds, in one or more series, and to use its best efforts to make proceeds of such Revenue Bonds available from time to time by December 31, 2014 to fund loans in at least the aggregate amount of $4,854,975 to finance or refinance multifamily residential rental projects for low- and moderate-income families located within the boundaries of the City. 3. The Assignor hereby consents to the election by the Assignee, if the Assignee in its discretion so decides, to treat all or any portion of the Assignment set forth herein as an allocation for a project with a carry forward purpose. 4. The Assignor and Assignee each agree that it will take such further action and adopt such further proceedings as may be required to implement the terms of this Assignment. 5. This Assignment is effective upon execution and is irrevocable. ~l IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Assignment on the date first written above. CITY OF BOULDER; COLORADO By: Jane S. Brautigam City Manager 1777 Broadway Boulder, CO 80302 Telephone (303) 441-3090 Fax (303) 441-4478 Attest: City Clerk on behalf of the Director of Finance and Record Approved as to form: City Attorney Housing Authority of the City of Boulder, d/b/a/ Boulder Housing Partners By: Executive Director Attest: By: Title: ~5-z DELEGATION AGREEMENT This Delegation Agreement is dated as of , 2011 between the City of Boulder, Colorado ("Boulder"), a home rule municipality, and the Housing Authority of the City of Boulder, d/b/a/ Boulder Housing Partners, established pursuant to Section 29-4-201 et seq., C.R.S. (the "Housing Act"), a Colorado housing authority ("BHP"), a body corporate and a political subdivision of the State of Colorado (the "State"). 1. Preliminary Statement. Among the matters of mutual inducement which have resulted in the execution of this Delegation Agreement are the following: (a) Boulder and BHP are authorized by the County and Municipality Development Revenue Bond Act, constituting Article 3 of Title 29, C.R.S. (the "Project Act") and by the Housing Act, respectively, to finance properties to the end that more adequate residential housing facilities for low- and middle-income families and persons may be provided, and to issue bonds evidencing such. (b) Section 18 of Article XIV of the Colorado Constitution and Part 2 of Article 1 of Title 29, C.R.S., authorize Boulder to delegate to BHP the authority to act as Boulder's agent to issue bonds under the Housing Act. (c) Pursuant to Section 24-32-1706 of the Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act, Part 17 of Article 32 of Title 24, C.R.S. (the "Allocation Act"), Boulder received an allocation of a portion of the State ceiling (as defined in the Allocation Act) for 2009, and pursuant to Section 146(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), Boulder elected to carryforward $4,461,300 of such State ceiling for qualified. residential rental projects (the "2009 PAB Allocation"), all of which remains unused. Pursuant LV V•R.S. -1/_ -1 BMillid.ir provided UIC necessary UlocunentatlVn (itlducernent IL 1~ Resolution, Preliminary Opinion of Bond Counsel, Certificate required by C.R.S. 24-32- 1709(2)(c)) to the State to carry forward its 2009 PAB Allocation in the amount of $4,461,300 prior to September 15, 2009 and filed an IRS Form 8328 for the 2009 PAB Allocation; (d) Boulder has determined to delegate to BHP its powers to issue revenue bonds using the 2009 PAB Allocation (the "Bonds") to be used to finance qualified residential rental projects. (e) BHP has determined to accept such delegation. (f) Neither the execution and delivery of this Delegation Agreement, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Delegation Agreement conflicts with or results in a breach of any of the terms, conditions or provisions of any legal restriction or any agreement or instrument to which Boulder or BHP is now a party or by which Boulder or BHP is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing. 1-3 2. Delegation by Boulder. (a) Boulder hereby delegates to BHP all authority of Boulder with respect to the issuance of the Bonds. Boulder acknowledges that, for federal income tax purposes, it will be the "issuer" of the Bonds, and authorizes BHP to act as its agent and representative in effecting the issuance of the Bonds and to take all necessary or desirable action towards accomplishing that purpose, including without limitation completing, executing and filing any IRS Form 8038s required. (b) Boulder agrees that it will take such further action and adopt such further proceedings as may be required to implement the terms of this Delegation Agreement. Such further action will include, but is not necessarily limited to, the execution of a Federal Tax Exemption Certificate in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. In executing such Certificate, Boulder will be entitled to review and exclusively rely upon the corresponding Federal Tax Exemption Certificate of BHP. 3. Acceptance of Delegation by BHP. (a) BHP hereby accepts the delegation granted to it by Boulder, subject to the terms and conditions herein contained. (b) BHP agrees that it will take such further action and adopt such further proceedings as may be required to implement the terms of this Delegation Agreement. 4. General Provisions. (a) This Delegation Agreement is hereby declared irrevocable during the BHP l at.,........ F ' a'« t, 4 1 Let1F-1S UL tt.~ly agreements to b VG entered ~ into t.. U_ ~ BI1P 1V1r LL1G ~ .../U1~./VS,.e of pSVvltiltlg iVi u G la"SUUncc of the Bonds, and this Delegation Agreement shall terminate upon the termination of all of such agreements. (b) This Delegation Agreement shall not constitute the debt or indebtedness of BHP or Boulder within the meaning of the Constitution or laws of the State, nor give rise to a pecuniary liability or a charge against the general credit or taxing powers of BHP or Boulder. [Signature page follows] [Signature page to Delegation Agreement] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this Delegation Agreement as of the day and year first above written. Housing Authority of the City of Boulder, d/b/a/ Boulder Housing Partners By: Executive Director Attest: By: Title: CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO By: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager Attest: By: City Clerk on behalf of the Director of Finance and Records Approved as to form: By: City Attorney ~ p cQ ~ a mss" X. pq DTI xX Q ~ Q -0 no - a 0 s p a a o fD c Q v O O 3 C (D o CD ° Aso ~ w Q ° ° _ 0 0 o` to ? c cc ~ •a 2 o C ro a cp O Q N -cm a' O ~ 2 O N X ] o N C. ~F C RESOLUTION #12 SERIES 2011 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTENT OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO D/B/A BOULDER HOUSING PARTNERS TO ISSUE PRIVATE ACTIVITY BONDS; PRESCRIBING CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH BONDS; APPROVING THE EXECUTION OF AN ASSIGNMEN'T' OF ALLOCATION AND A DELEGATION AGREEMENT; AND CONTAINING OTHER PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE PROPOSED ISSUArdCE OF SUCH BONDS AND THE EXECUTION OF SUCH AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, The Housing Authority of the City of Boulder, Colorado d/b/a Boulder Housing Partners (the "Authority"), is organized pursuant to Article 4, Part 2, Title 29, of Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, the Act authorizes the Authority to borrow money upon its bonds, notes debentures or other evidences of indebtedness for the purposes specified in the Act and to secure the same by pledges of its revenues and mortgages upon property held or to be held by the Authority as provided in the Act; and WHEREAS, the Authority intends to issue and sell up to $9,315,275 in principal amount of its private activity bonds (the "Bonds") pursuant to the Act and other applicable laws of the State of Colorado (the "State") to finance a portion of the costs related to several multifamily rehabilitation projects and new multifamily projects as part of the Authority's Moving to Work initiative (collectively, the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the Project will be located within the City of Boulder, Colorado (the "City"); and WHEREAS, the Authority wishes to declare its intention to authorize and issue the Bonds for the purpose of financing the Project; and WHEREAS, in order to comply with the provisions of the Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act, Part 17 of Article 32 of Title 24, Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended (the "Allocation Act") and the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), the Authority has been requested by the City to execute an Assignment of Allocation (the "Assignment") and a Delegation Agreement (the "Delegation Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the Authority desires to execute the Assignment and the Delegation Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO, D/B/A BOULDER HOUSING PARTNERS: Section 1. The Authority does hereby declare its intention to authorize the issuance and sale of the Bonds, subject to the unqualified approving opinion of Kutak Rock LLP, Bond Counsel, under and in accordance with the Act, in an amount necessary to pay a portion of the cost of the Project, presently estimated to be not in excess of $9,315,275, and upon such terms and conditions as shall be set forth in a resolution of the Authority authorizing the issuance and sale of the Bonds at a meeting to be held for such purpose. Section 2. A portion of the cost of financing the Project will be paid out of the proceeds of the Bonds. The Bonds and the interest thereon shall never constitute a multiple-fiscal year direct or indirect debt or other financial obligation whatsoever of the Authority or the debt or indebtedness of the Authority within the meaning of any provision or limitation of the constitution or statutes of the State and shall never constitute or give rise to a pecuniary liability of the Authority or a charge against its general credit. Section 3. The Assignment and the Delegation Agreement are hereby approved and the Chair of the Authority and the Executive Director of the Authority are authorized to execute the Assignment and the Delegation Agreement. The Chair of the Authority and the Executive Director of the Authority are also hereby authorized to take all other actions as may be necessary to implement the intent and purpose of the Assignment and the Delegation Agreement and to take all other actions as may be necessary to comply with the Allocation Act and the Code. Section 4. The appropriate officers and employees of the Authority are authorized and directed to take all action necessary or desirable to implement the provisions of this Resolution, including without limitation, the execution and delivery of all agreements, documents and certificates relating to the issuance of the Bonds, the execution of the Assignment and the Delegation Agreement and compliance with the Allocation Act and the Code. Section 5. The Project is intended to promote the preservation of affordable housing within the City. Section 6. The agreements of the Authority set forth above are expressly conditioned upon the City delegating its 2012 Private Activity Bond Volume Cap Allocation to the Authority. Nothing contained in this Resolution shall be construed as requiring the Authority to issue the Bonds, and the decision to issue the Bonds shall be in the complete discretion of the Authority. Section 7. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption by the Board of Commissioners and all prior resolutions or portions thereof inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this September 12, 2011. [SEAL] HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO, a Colorado housing authority, d/b/a BOULDER HOUSING PARTNERS By Angela McCormick Chair, Board of Directors Attest: Betsey Martens Executive Director