Diamond Tabron: Yes
Not Voting: LaBrunerie, Ascani, Mitchell
Motion passed: 6:0
6 - Stanton, Head, Trotter, Bush-Cook, Hunt and Tabron
3 - LaBrunerie, Ascani and Mitchell
1 - Carroll
Yes:
Excused:
Non-Voting:
VIII. NEW BUSINESS
ADA Compliance
City is moving forward with all public information having to be ADA compliant. This include
any attachments from a meeting or documents published online. This has been difficult
for staff as some things just don’t work. With this being said, we are unable to take
documents that are just handed out at the meetings anymore. Staff wants documents
sent in early so Tiffani can review them and run them through the ADA tracker. Tabron
stated that his employer is doing the same thing as well and any document provided for
the public has to be accessible no matter what the person disability is. Amelunke stated
as well that its not just the City as Columbia Housing Authority and other entities are
doing this as well. Stanton asked about the time needed to be able to turn the
documents in for Tiffani to convert them. The board discussed having the documents
turned in 4 business days before the 24-hours deadline for publishing the agenda. Board
suggested having the City’s ADA compliance officer or lawyer come to the next meeting
to discuss ADA more. Hunt suggested having Tiffani send out a reminder email about
getting items turned in ahead of time. Head asked if there is someone who has a
disability that is wanting to buy a Land Trust home if we would be able to accommodate
them under ADA. Amelunke stated that we should be able to. Tabron stated that we
should be able to accommodate them as well if the bank or other entities had not already
done so already during the process.
Land Donation Policy Review
Hunt reviewed our current land donation policy and found that it’s short and a little bit
cryptic for people who actually wants to donate their home. This came about as Hunt
been approached by several people who want to donate their home but don’t know the ins
and out of how to go about doing so. He created an information sheet (that may go to
potential donors) that starts off with a summary that explains how the land trust works,
then goes on to explain that people are starting to express interest in donating their
houses. Hunt found a document from the California Association of Community Land
Trusts that explains how donations can work and used it as a template to come up with
one that fits for our situation. Hunt explained the different options for supporters who plan
to move elsewhere such as an outright gift or a charitable bargain sale. He also explained
the different options for supporters who plan to continue living in their home which include
a will/trust, a beneficiary deed or a gift (or sale) of the land only. One thing that is
pertinent to the policy we have written now is that donors will need to understand that not
every house will meet CCLT needs. Stanton initial thought is to make sure the policy fits
to our current situations so we could make those possible. His current solution is to fix
our current policy so we could meet what our current potential donors are trying to do and
then expand on it or solve the problem with things Hunt has learned. Stanton asked if our
currently policy and procedure in place now will allow donations to happen. Both Hunt
and Amelunke stated that our current policy will but its not covered as well as it could be.
The board discussed some possible open-ended language that could be expanded on for
father discussion as each house will be a case by case basis. Stanton wants there to be
a document that others can go through as a check list so all bases will be covered when
no one in the room is still around. Amelunke stated that there is a way to do it right now
that just lays it all out but agrees with Hunt that it would be good to have additional things
in there to help clarification on what it all means.
