MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF
THE HEALTH, EDUCATIONAL AND HOUSING FACILITY BOARD
OF THE CITY OF MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE
Wednesday, November 5, 2025
The regular meeting of The Health, Educational and Housing Facility Board of the City of Memphis, Tennessee (the “Board”) was held pursuant to public notice published in The Daily News on Wednesday, October 29, 2025, simultaneous posting to the Daily Memphian website at: www.dailymemphian.com, and the public notice was continuously published on the Board’s website at: www.memphishehf.com. The published meeting time was 12:00 Noon. The meeting was held in the conference room in the Board offices, located at 65 Union Avenue, Suite 1120, Memphis, TN 38103.
The following Directors were present:
Daniel T. Reid, Chairman Monice Hagler
Buckner Wellford Cliff Henderson
Howard Eddings, Jr. Vincent Sawyer
Courtnee Melton-Fant
Staff and others attending: Trey McKnight, Stephanie Bryant, JP Townsend and Nikki Abraham; Charles E. Carpenter and Corbin I. Carpenter, General Counsel; Katrina Shephard (Zoom), legal assistant to General Counsel, and Mike Humes, consultant to the HEHFB Strategic Planning Committee.
Also participating in person and/or via remote Zoom virtual platform were Gabe Velasquez of November 6 Investments and Jarad Bingham of The Hospitality Hub representing Hub North, LP.; Mark Jobe, Esq. and Dalota Beasley of Glankler Brown Law Firm and Jay Mann of Capstone Realty and Management, LLC representing Lakes at Ridgeway and Stonegate Apartments; Frank Stockdale Carney, Esq. of Evans Petree Law Firm, Mendel Fischer, Neil Knopf, and Shrage Marasow (Zoom) representing Eden Pointe, Scenic Hills, Grainge Hill, Timber Pines, Bridgeport Manor, Coronado Manor, and Watkins Manor; Austin (A.T.) Harrison, Marilyn Brien, and Jan Kidder (Zoom) of Memphis Interfaith Coalition for Action & Hope (MICAH); Simeon Ike of Greater Memphis Housing Justice Project; Tiffany Gray of the Black Clergy Collaborative of Memphis and The Multicultural Progressive South; and several members of the public were also present.
With a quorum present, the regular meeting of the Board was called to order at 12:00 Noon by Daniel T. Reid, Chairman.
Chairman Reid stated that in compliance with the Open Meetings Law codified in Section 8-44-101 to 8-44-108, inclusive of the Tennessee Code Annotated, as amended, The Health, Educational and Housing Facility Board of the City of Memphis, Tennessee is holding its regular meeting on Wednesday, November 5 2025 @ Noon as an open public meeting in its conference room located at 65 Union Avenue, Suite 1120, Memphis, Tennessee 38103.
Chairman Reid stated supplemental Board meeting materials could be accessed on the Board’s website: www.memphishehf.com and reminded all attendees participating via remote access to enter their name and affiliated entities into the Zoom platform for record keeping purposes.
Public Comment
Chairman Daniel Reid opened the floor for public comment and advised that all comments should be limited to two (2) minutes per speaker.
There was no public comment.
Approval of Minutes
Vincent Sawyer moved for approval of the Minutes of the October 1, 2025 Regular Meeting, which was seconded by Cliff Henderson and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
Attorney’s Report
Charles Carpenter presented the legal report, as follows:
1. Carpenter reminded the Board of his previous report of one (1) new lawsuit regarding the Mason Village Apartments PILOT property filed by one of its tenants and the lawsuit is pro se, meaning the tenant filed the lawsuit on her own behalf. Carpenter reported that the Board was sued in addition to the management company and the matter was set to appear before the General Sessions Court in the week of August 4, 2025. Carpenter reported that he appeared on behalf of the Board at that time, and the tenant indicated that she wanted to hire an attorney, so that matter was reset for September 23, 2025 at 10:00 am so that the tenant would have the opportunity to hire a lawyer. Carpenter reported that he appeared on behalf of the Board at that time, and the tenant did have an attorney appear before General Sessions Court on September 23, 2025, but the attorney stated to the court that she and the tenant had not finalized their arrangements yet, so that matter was reset for October 28, 2025 for trial. Carpenter stated that because the attorney was not officially involved with the party, the court yielded to the attorney and did not make any decision concerning the motion to dismiss the Board, even though the law is clear that the Board is granted statutory immunity pursuant to Tennessee Law based on the fact that it is serving as a public function on behalf of the City of Memphis. Carpenter stated that he appeared on behalf of the Board before the General Sessions Court on October 28, 2025 and all parties were represented, he made the formal motion of dismissal, and that motion was granted. Now, the matter will go forward against Mason Village, the PILOT Lessee, and the management company, with the Board being officially dismissed from that litigation.
2. Carpenter reported one (1) new lawsuit filed by Patricia Muhammad, individually and as Parent and Natural Guardian of Alirra Lawson, Minor vs. The Health, Educational and Housing Facility Board of the City of Memphis, Dogwood Trace Apartments and Parawest Community Development, LLC. Carpenter stated that this is a Circuit Court lawsuit that has just been filed with the allegations indicating some health and safety issues and that the minor child fell through a missing step from the second floor. Carpenter stated that this case is in a discovery phase. Carpenter stated that his Firm will monitor the case and will seek dismissal of the Board at the appropriate time. Carpenter stated that his Firm has already sent a letter to the Plaintiff’s counsel indicating the Board’s statutory immunity and requesting that the Board be dismissed before any further action is taken, but his Firm will keep the Board advised.
3. Carpenter reported receiving two (2) additional claims for personal injury:
a. Brenda Hearn vs Forrest Creek Townhomes; alleged date of loss of September 28, 2025
b. Tylon Richardson vs Jamesbridge Apartments; alleged date of loss of October 21, 2025
Carpenter stated that both claims have sent letters to all parties to preserve evidence and are in the introductory phase, but his Firm will keep the Board advised and ensure proper processes are followed.
Buckner Wellford stated that if it is included in the form letter that is provided to plaintiff’s counsel by Carpenter’s Firm in these types of cases that under Tennessee Law, the Board has statutory immunity and is to be dismissed, that his Firm will seek attorney's fees. Wellford stated that adding this type of language could assist in getting the Board dismissed more expeditiously.
[At this point in the Board Meeting, one or more members of the public participating via the Zoom platform link injected a pornographic video and audio material into the public meeting. HEHFB staff responded quickly and disconnected the Board conference Zoom Room for a short time and was able to remove the offensive members of the public from the Zoom meeting and reconnect the Board conference Zoom Room and resumed the Board meeting. HEHFB staff was unable to admit any further virtual participants into the Zoom meeting link following this occurrence.]
Carpenter stated Wellford’s point is well stated and that information regarding attorney’s fees is included in the form letter. Wellford stated that he supports enforcing Carpenter seeking attorney fees in those types of circumstances, and that is a powerful point that can be made through filing a motion with the court.
4. Carpenter reported Bond and PILOT closing activities for October 2025:
a. Hilldale Apartments Bond was closed on October 9, 2025, and Bonds in the amount of $14,300,000 were issued.
b. Hilldale Apartments PILOT was also closed on October 9, 2025, for a 20-year term.
c. Ridgecrest Apartments Bond and PILOT Closings are in progress and would typically close no later than December 15, 2025, but the federal government shutdown has delayed some of the provisions, particularly dealing with HUD and the Housing Assistance Program (HAP) Contracts and other approvals. Tennessee Housing Development Agency (THDA) is aware of that and is working with applicants to extend the closing date beyond the December 15th deadline.
d. Surrey Apartments Bond and PILOT Closings are in progress and would typically close no later than December 15, 2025, but the federal government shutdown has delayed some of the provisions, particularly dealing with HUD and the Housing Assistance Program (HAP) Contracts and other approvals. Tennessee Housing Development Agency (THDA) is aware of that and is working with applicants to extend the closing date beyond the December 15th deadline.
5. Carpenter reported that THDA has announced Round Two awardees and Covenant Gardens Senior, a project induced by this Board for Bonds, was approved for volume cap and tax credit allocation. Carpenter stated that his firm will continue to keep the Board updated on the progress of this closing as well, as this closing will also be affected by some of the same issues that have been previously reported regarding the impact of the federal government shutdown on Bond closings as stated above.
6. Carpenter reminded the Board of his previous report on the fire damages that occurred at Sterling Townhomes involving two (2) separate fires that damaged many structures on the property, as evidenced by the “NOTICE OF CONDEMNATION HEARING”, in which ownership filed an administrative appeal, and the condemnation proceeding has been temporarily stayed pending further actions on appeal, which will be heard in the Environmental Court. Carpenter reminded the Board that this is a new PILOT that was put in place this year 2025 and stated that this is a matter of first impression for the Board. Carpenter reminded the Board that there are ongoing issues with the insurance company denying the claims from the fire damages under the policy and Code Enforcement has gotten involved via the “NOTICE OF CONDEMNATION HEARING”, which has now be docketed in Environmental Court. Carpenter stated that the management company, Multi-South Management Company, LLC, and the PILOT Lessee are cooperating, but they do not have any definite information on timetable or course of action for restoring the property. Because of these facts and circumstances, Carpenter stated that his Firm has elected to issue a Notice of Legal Default for Sterling Townhomes to reserve all of the rights for the Board. As this is a matter of first impression, Carpenter stated he wants to ensure the Board has all of its rights available, including the right to terminate the PILOT if the Board so chooses. Carpenter reported that the Notice of Legal Default has been filed and the PILOT Lessee and its management company will appear before the Board at the December 3, 2025 Board meeting to provide the Board with a complete status update and their proposed action plan moving forward. Carpenter stated that there are no tenants currently residing at the property and the status update will provide the Board with more information to make an informed decision on how it would like to proceed, with all remedies being available to the Board at that time.
7. Carpenter reported that his Firm has been monitoring the Shelby County PILOT Ad Hoc Committee on behalf of the Board and reported that the original authorization for the PILOT Ad Hoc Committee expired on August 31, 2025. Carpenter reported that this committee has been reauthorized, and that committee has been meeting, with the last meeting held on October 16, 2025. Carpenter reported that the committee discussed having recommendations made and to have a meeting on or about November 6, 2025. Carpenter stated that his Firm has not received any additional information regarding that upcoming meeting on November 6, 2025, but it was also mentioned that a subsequent meeting would be held on November 20, 2025, when the committee would invite all PILOT issuing entities to respond to their recommendations before the recommendations are submitted to the full Shelby County Commission, and will keep the Board advised.
8. Finally, Carpenter reported that there is a bill that was introduced in the Tennessee General Assembly at the last session by Senator Brent Taylor, with a corresponding bill in the house, seeking to set up a state-wide PILOT issuing authority. Carpenter reported that the bill proposes to eliminate any ability of municipal governments and counties to issue PILOTs and proposes a state authority to issue all PILOTs. Carpenter stated that this bill did not have much traction in 2025, but the bill sponsors will be introducing this bill again in January 2026, and his Firm will closely monitor the developments. Carpenter stated that this bill would not be in the best interest of local governments and counties. Carpenter reminded the Board that The Health, Educational and Housing Facility Board of the County of Shelby also has the ability to issue PILOTs, but those PILOTs require approval by the Shelby County Commission. Carpenter stated that this additional step with elected officials and politics involved has in effect eliminated the County’s PILOT program.
Buckner Wellford asked for confirmation that if the Shelby County Commission passed some ordinance that elimated the authority of different entities to issue PILOTs, that would not impact this Board’s legal authority to issue PILOTs within the City of Memphis. Carpenter confirmed that it is correct. Wellford stated that although when this Board grants a PILOT, the Shelby County taxes and City of Memphis taxes are abated, and that could be impacted. Carpenter stated that when this Board’s PILOT program was structured, there was an agreement between the City of Memphis and Shelby County that allowed both City and County taxes to be abated. Carpenter stated that the way that abatement works is that the base taxes are frozen, and 50% of that if for the PILOT, so the City and County taxing authorities continue to receive tax payments. Wellford stated that in a worst-case scenario, Shelby County Commission would only be able to affect the abatement of County taxes, which in a way would make the incentive less attractive, but the County cannot prohibit the Board from issuing PILOTs in the City of Memphis. Carpenter stated that assessment is correct and if that were to happen, that would be a question for all PILOT issuing entities because that is the process for every PILOT issuing entity that City and County taxes are abated. Wellford stated he would also assume that there would be a legal issue as to whether the state could stop local government and county PILOT granting entities, to which Carpenter agreed. Howard Eddings, Jr. Asked what the rationale is for Senator Taylor in introducing this type of bill. Carpenter stated that any rationale he could provide would only be speculation. Carpenter stated that in review of the bill, all of the introductory language talks about how important PILOTs are, and how useful they are to stimulate growth and development, but it goes on to say that it is so important that is should just be done at the state level rather than at the individual county and city levels. Carpenter stated that this would cause an amendment of all the current statutes, which are under state law, that grant that authority to the cities, which is how this Board has received its delegation of authority to have the PILOT program it has.
Trey McKnight stated that he will be speaking more on this subject in the Executive Director’s report, but what Commissioner Henri Brooks and the Shelby County PILOT Ad Hoc Committee are doing is trying to take away this Board’s authority to abate County taxes. Wellford stated that this Board does have an interest in this because anything that makes the abatement less meaningful could impact the Board, so he understands that the Board has an interest in it, but there is only so much the Shelby County Commission can do. Carpenter stated that when looking at development costs and building codes, it costs just as much to build affordable housing as it does to build market rate housing, and from a developer’s standpoint, because there are so many restrictions, rent controls, and so forth with affordable housing, there will be no developers coming to this City to build or redevelop affordable housing without the PILOT incentive. Developers will choose to either build market rate developments or will choose to develop in another jurisdiction.
Carpenter stated that the City of Memphis and Shelby County has the highest taxes in the State of Tennessee, estimated at almost double the tax rate of Metro Nashville, and there is a lot of activity happening. Unless the leadership decides how to grow the economy to bring in additional revenue, all the leadership will be able to do is increase taxes to bring in additional revenues in order to address all of the urgent needs in this community. Carpenter stated that with this narrow view that leadership has, it will be difficult to grow and provide decent affordable housing for residents who have limited resources and limited income and limited job opportunities.
There being no further questions or comments, the Legal Report was concluded.
Action Items-
1. Affordable Multifamily MHA PILOT Application for Hub North, LP
Gabe Velasquez and Jarad Bingham entered the meeting.
Charles Carpenter introduced this agenda item reminding the Board that at its July 9, 2025 Board meeting, the Board approved a Bond Inducement Resolution for Hub North, LP. Carpenter stated the project will be new construction using a modular home structure that is being proposed. Carpenter advised the Board that the applicant applied to THDA’s Round Two and was unsuccessful. However, there have been ongoing discussions with THDA, and in 2026 Round One, this applicant will reapply. Carpenter stated that in addition to the Bond Inducement, the applicant is before the Board today seeking approval of a PILOT for this project that would be very beneficial to the project to make it a reality. Carpenter introduced representatives Gabe Velasquez and Jarad Bingham in attendance for this agenda item and turned the meeting over to the representatives for further comments. Velasquez thanked the Board for its support, stating that the Board has been instrumental in guiding them through this process and indicated that they are available to answer any questions.
Carpenter advised the Board of the project summary included in the Board meeting materials and reported that his Firm and Board staff have completed the PILOT Application Submittal Conference with the applicant, and the project is something that would be welcomed and needed in the community. Carpenter reminded the Board that many projects that are presented to the Board are rehabilitation projects of existing units, but as this project is new construction, it will add much needed units to the affordable housing units and help to reduce the approximately 30,000 unit shortfall of affordable housing units that is currently plaguing the community. Carpenter stated that the application complies with the policies and procedures of the Board and his Firm would encourage the Board to look favorably upon the application.
Howard Eddings, Jr. asked if there have been conversations with the community and with those within the neighborhood and local area. Jared Bingham stated that this has been the most meaningful communication project he has been a part of, stating that the site is located at the former Manasses High School, and there is a lot of pride and a strong Alumni Association from Manasses High School. Bingham stated that both the new Manasses High School Administration and Faculty, and the residents and graduates of Manasses were instrumental in helping design the project, down to the material selection and colors and facades. Eddings stated that being modular homes, have the units been designed in such a way as not to look like trailer homes. Bingham stated that the units look neighborhood-contextual, with the closest comparison being the housing stock throughout New Chicago.
Buckner Wellford asked a question concerning the RUUM Financing line item on the applicant's Sources and Uses Table. Velasquez stated that there is some philanthropic capital secured, approximately $6 million, and the remaining capital stack consists of the 4% LIHTC and some deferred developer's fees. Wellford stated he wants to ensure that the PILOT being granted is not premature until the applicant is awarded the Bond allocation that it will be seeking in THDA’s Round One in 2026. Carpenter advised that if the project is awarded the Bond allocation in 2026, both transactions would be closed at the same time. Carpenter explained that, as many developers do, the applicant has a checklist of items that they want to be in place, so that when the Round One opens, the applicant will have the approvals prepared and ready to go. Carpenter stated that his Firm and Board staff have had the discussion with the development team because this PILOT commitment, if approved, is only valid for a six (6) month period, and if things are not in place to be closed within that period, the applicant would be required to appear before the Board to request a closing extension for both the Bond and PILOT approvals. Carpenter stated that the development team has reviewed the timetable for the project and feels it is prudent for them to move forward with this request at this time.
Wellford stated that one of the tenant benefits that is being committed to as part of this application is campus-wide free Wi-Fi and cable, which is an exception to the rule and exactly what the Strategic Planning Committee is after, by trying to determine the best way to accomplish “digital inclusion and equity” (quoting the Smart City Ordinance), and this developer is actually going to be offering that as a tenant benefit. Wellford stated that the Board would love to be a part of something that ends up making that more common as a tenant benefit and he wants to commend the developers for including that commitment because it is unusual for the Board to see that as a Tenant Benefit Commitment. Carpenter stated that the Board’s PILOT portfolio does include several projects with Alco Management, Inc. that do offer Property-Wide Free Wi-Fi as a Tenant Benefit Commitment, but he agreed with Wellford that this commitment is rare for the Board to see overall. Trey McKnight stated that staff has toured the Hospitality Hub Facility, and it is exceptional. Stepanie Bryant asked representatives to advise the Board of the demographic that this project would be serving, as it is not the typical demographic of the Board’s PILOT portfolio properties. Velasques stated that this project’s targeted demographic is un-homed families, families experiencing homelessness, and the statistics show that this typically includes a mother and three+ children. Velasquez stated that The Hospitality Hub is currently operating a smaller version of this model out of its location at 590 Washington Avenue and asked Bingham to discuss some of the services being offered. Bingham stated that individuals that are living without economic security are always on guard, and when an individual becomes homeless with nowhere to go, that hurts a person in ways that need to be cared for. Bingham stated that The Hospitality Hub has been built environment and operational models that help care for that so that people can repair their lives from the inside out, and the success rate has been great. Bingham stated that The Hospitality Hub does not participate in the revolving wheel of shelter-to-street-street to shelter because of the lack of those types of interventions. McKnight stated that Chairman Reid witnessed a homeless person behind his workplace building and he notified McKnight and The Hospitality Hub was there that same day to pick that person up and offer their help, and that person has now been housed. Reid stated that it was a good experience.
Eddings stated that the application stated that there will be a dining hall and asked if this will be a communal space where residents can eat on-site if they choose to. Bingham stated that every residence will have its own kitchen, but when some people come to their program, in such a transition that food will be provided, but as that person matriculates into stable participation in the neighborhood and an environment of their own, the person will learn to cook in their own kitchen. Velasquez stated there will be a laundry facility as well the the Hub staff will do tenants’ laundry for them. Bryant stated that one of the most interesting things she learned during the tour of The Hospitality Hub and during the group’s presentation to the Board for their Bond Inducement is that no family that includes a male child over the age of five (5) years old can be housed in any shelter in this area, and this project is geared toward helping families like that. Bingham stated that there is also a small percentage of homeless families that includes a single father and children, of which no shelter will take either, so this project is really a transitional neighborhood for the community that needs it. There being no further questions or comments,
Cliff Henderson made a motion to approve the Affordable Multifamily MHA PILOT Application for Hub North, LP. Monice Hagler seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
Let the record reflect that Vincent Sawyer was recused from this vote.
Gabe Velasquez and Jarad Bingham left the meeting.
2. PILOT Refinancing Application for Capstone Ridgeway, LLC (d/b/a Lakes at Ridgeway)
Mark Jobe, Dakota Beasely, and Jay Mann entered the meeting.
Carpenter introduced this agenda item, introduced Mark Jobe, Esq., legal counsel to the applicant, and Jay Mann, PILOT Lessee, and stated that Lakes at Ridgeway and Stonegate Apartments (Agenda Items 2 & 3) are two (2) existing PILOTS owned and operated by the same ownership and management entity and can be discussed together, but must be voted on separately. Carpenter stated that Board staff and his Firm completed the submittal conferences for both Refinancing Applications with the applicant, Jay Mann, and his counsel, Mark Jobe, and turned the meeting over to representatives for a review of the Refinancing Applications and for what the proceeds will be used. Jobe stated that the existing financing that was approved by the Board several years ago as part of the original PILOT Application is expiring, and ownership has already exercised an extension, but it is coming to term so action must be taken there. Jobe stated that the original financing was through Rock360 and was two (2) separate loans. Jobe stated that this Refinancing Application is for an aggregated loan, one loan secured by two (2) properties. Jobe stated that the bulk of the proceeds from the refinancing will go to pay off the existing loans, fees and expenses, and also facilitate the continued renovation of both properties. Jobe stated that the timeline submitted as part of the application stated that the interiors will be completed by mid-year 2026, with full renovations expected to be completed by the end of the year 2026. Significant progress has been made at both properties, and Jobe stated his client has been working closely with the Board to address any issues and intent to continue to do that to complete the projects. Jobe stated that this financing will provide any carryover funds needed to do so and is not a cash-out refinancing and no funds are coming back to the property owner or being sent out as dividends, and is all being used to pay off existing loans, continue renovations, and pay expenses.
Townsend reported that both properties have been under renovation, and the renovations are internal as of now, with some exterior areas of renovations remaining, but consistent work has been noted through property inspections. Townsend stated that any areas of concern that have been noted following property inspections have been addressed and communication between Board staff and the PILOT Lessee’s representatives has improved, particularly following issuance of progress report emails to the PILOT Lessee and property representatives. Carpenter advised the Board of Compliance Reports and photographs of the properties are included in the Board materials for Board review. Carpenter stated that most of the Board’s PILOT properties are single asset entities with loans being issued for only one property, and with this refinancing, it was discussed with the applicant, if there is an event of default, how that default would be handled and the lender is aware of the Board’s policies and procedures and would be able to allocate the outstanding indebtedness per property and his Firm has no issue with that approach from a legal structuring standpoint. Carpenter stated both applications comply with the Board’s policies and procedures and would recommend the Board look favorably upon both applications. There being no further questions or comments,
Buckner Wellford made a motion to approve the PILOT Refinancing Application for Capstone Ridgeway, LLC (d/b/a Lakes at Ridgeway). Howard Eddings, Jr. seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
3. PILOT Refinancing Application for Capstone Stonegate, LLC (d/b/a Stonegate Apartments)
There being no further questions or comments,
Monice Hagler made a motion to approve the PILOT Refinancing Application for Capstone Stonegate, LLC (d/b/a Stonegate Apartments). Howard Eddings, Jr. seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
Mark Jobe, Dakota Beasley, and Jay Mann left the meeting.
4. Status of Mendel Ficher and Shrage Marasow PILOT Portfolio:
Frank Stockdale Carney, Mendel Fischer, and Niel Knopf entered the meeting.
Carpenter began by stating that at Chairman Reid’s directive, when the Board has applicants appear at a Board meeting that have more than one (1) property in the Board’s PILOT portfolio, the staff conducts a review of that developer’s entire portfolio. Carpenter stated that the Board is familiar with this developer’s portfolio because the developer has appeared before the Board over a period of time now and the properties in this developer’s portfolio area at different levels of development and activity. Carpenter stated that today, the portfolio is scheduled for a status update on each of these properties and turned the meeting over to representatives for a status update.
Carney stated that prior to the Board’s October 1, 2025 Board Meeting, he distributed a report to the Board that outlines the social services at these properties, and he can go into further detail what tenant benefits are being offered at these properties. Carpenter recommended that due to the number of properties, it would be best to address each property one at a time.
a. Eden Pointe- Under Observation
Mendel Fischer began by stating that he is requesting that the Board move Eden Pointe into regular monitoring due to the progress that has been made at the property. JP Townsend stated that Tenant Benefits are in place at Eden Pointe and external observable conditions of this property are in compliance. Stephanie Bryant stated that the project is currently at an 81% occupancy rate and the Board staff recommends Eden Pointe to be placed into regular compliance monitoring. There being no further questions or comments,
Vincent Sawyer made a motion to approve Eden Pointe to be moved down from Under Observation compliance monitoring level and placed into regular compliance monitoring. Cliff Henderson seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
b. Scenic Hills- Under Observation
Mendel Fischer began by stating that he is requesting that the Board move Scenic Hills into regular monitoring due to the progress that has been made at the property. JP Townsend stated one of the main concerns at this property was that some of the fencing had been damaged, but the necessary repairs have been made, Tenant Benefits are in place at Scenic Hills and external observable conditions of this property are in compliance. Stephanie Bryant stated that the project is currently at an 85% occupancy rate, and the Board recommends Scenic Hills to be placed into regular compliance monitoring. There being no further questions or comments,
Vincent Sawyer made a motion to approve Eden Pointe to be moved down from Under Observation compliance monitoring level and placed into regular compliance monitoring. Cliff Henderson seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
c. Grainge Hill-Compliance Concerns
Neil Knopf stated that ownership and management has been happy to work with Board staff on making the necessary repairs noted by the HEHFB compliance inspector, but the one item that is continuously noted and he would ask the Board how this item affects the tenants, is the issue of the drainage ditch that goes through the property. Knopf stated that Townsend has noted in progress reports that the ditch has been secured and there is no potential liability or any way tenants can be harmed by it, as it has been permanently fenced with a chain-link fence and welded metal going through the parking lot. Knopf stated that he and ownership are working on a solution as the ditch belongs to the City of Memphis, but the City is not taking responsibility for it. Knopf stated that ownership has worked out some solutions with contractors on how the issue can be resolved, but those solutions are expensive, and ownership is currently reviewing those with legal counsel, but this does not affect tenants in any way. JP Townsend reported that his main concern at this property was the drainage ditch, and it has now been properly secured and does not pose a health or safety concern at this time. Townsend stated that this is not a permanent solution because the erosion of the area will continue until a permanent solution is found, but at this time, the area is secured. Stephanie Bryant stated that the project is currently at an 89% occupancy rate, and the Board staff recommends Grainge Hill be moved down one level and placed Under Observation for a 90-day period. Bryant stated that this approach is consistent with how Eden Pointe and Grainge Hill were monitored and there should be a status update for the property at the February 4, 2026 Board meeting. There being no further questions or comments,
Vincent Sawyer made a motion to approve Grainge Hill to be moved down from Compliance Concerns compliance monitoring level and placed into Under Observation compliance monitoring level for 90-days with a status update to be provided to the Board at the February 4, 2026 Board Meeting. Cliff Henderson seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
d. Timber Pines-Compliance Concerns
Knopf stated that Timber Pines has been able to move forward with significant progress concerning the outstanding items cited by the Board, with the only outstanding item being the fencing by a drainage ditch that runs between this property and the neighboring property. Knopf stated that this is a larger project and ownership must replace a few hundred feet of fencing, with over half of the fencing already having been replaced. Knopf stated that the remaining fencing to be completed will be done in short order and was delayed due to weather. Townsend reported that all of the occupied and unoccupied areas have been maintained, but there is a laundry facility on property that does not appear to be operational for tenants and asked if the “Stop Work” Order that was previously posted on the laundry facility was still in place. Knopf stated that the “Stop Work” Order is no longer in place, and that there was a building permit that Shelby County wanted for a neighboring building and placed a “Stop Work” Order on this property’s laundry facility, but upon further review of the “Stop Work” Order, the code identified it for a different building. Knopf stated that the permit that Shelby County needed has been pulled, and Shelby County is satisfied. Knopf stated that the only reason the laundry facility is not being used yet is because of Memphis Light Gas and Water (MLGW), and they have not put the meters in yet.
Additionally, Knopf stated that there is an area that has been dug up on the property because MLGW is in the process of replacing gas lines in that neighborhood and there is nothing ownership or management can do about it, so meters will be put in following the gas line replacements and will be done based on MLGW’s schedule. Townsend reported observations of a recent accident that happend on-site where a vehicle ran into a building and stated that during his last inspection of the property, renovations were underway to repair that area. Knopf stated that those repairs have been completed. Townsend asked Knopf is there are still holes in the drive on the second phase of the project that has begun to be occupied. Knopf stated that management has begun occupying that area, but holes still remain in an area that does not affect occupied areas of the buildings. Knopf stated that underground pipes had a leak that ownership was trying to resolve and the holes that are there will be filled in and repaved as soon as the leak is fixed. Townsend confirmed that these items are still outstanding.
Buckner Wellford asked if the security gate is still broken. Knopf stated that it is and that it is something he wanted to bring before the Board and ask what the correct way is to move forward with this issue because the gate has was installed and was operational, but the area is very narrow and only covers a portion of the property because Gowan Drive runs directly through the property. Knopf stated that tenants do not view the gate as a tenant benefit, but as a nuisance, and tenants have intentionally hit the gate more than ten (10) times, and now the motor requires replacement, the arms will require replacement, and the gate will need to be welded, and these recurring costs to fix the gate at upwards of $5,000 every few months does not benefit anyone and tenants do not view it as a benefit. Wellford asked if tenants are able to access this property without going through the security gate, to which Knopf stated yes. Wellford asked if this item should be removed as a tenant benefit if it does not serve a purpose. Stephanie Bryant advised the Board that the PILOT Lessee would be required to re-certify the Tenant Benefits for the PILOT property if the Board saw fit to allow that. Wellford asked Townsend if the gate is serving any purpose. Townsend stated that this property has been met with quite a bit of vandalism and was placed in the Board's additional compliance oversight step-process due to ongoing issues with illegal tire dumping on the property. Townsend stated that the property also suffered some fire damage that was caused by vandalism, but that this property, along with all properties included in this developer’s PILOT portfolio, does have security patrols and security is active on the property. Townsend stated that the property is set up where one portion of the property is one side of Gowan Drive, and the other portion is across the street, and there is an old gate that covers only a corner of the entire property, and the rest of the property is open. Townsend stated that if the security gate in question is repaired or re-installed, it is only securing the leasing office and a corner of the property. Wellford proposed that the developer should be permitted to remove the security gate as a tenant benefit and allow the developer to recertify the tenant benefits for the property. Stephanie Bryant stated that the project is currently at an 80% occupancy rate, and the Board staff recommends Timber Pines be moved down one level and placed Under Observation for a 90-day period and there should be a status update for the property at the February 4, 2026 Board meeting. Wellford stated that he would agree to review the property’s tenant benefit commitments and any necessary amendments at the February 4, 2026 Board meeting. Carpenter stated that it would give the PILOT Lessee time to review its current tenant benefit commitments and make any changes necessary at that time. Vincent Sawyer asked what the PILOT Lessee’s plan is for the gate. Knopf stated that it is not hurting the tenants for the gate to remain in an open state without repair and leave in an as-is condition. Sawyer asked if the holes on the back side of the property that were discussed earlier are accessible to the public. Knopf stated that the way tenants enter and exit that side of the property, they do not pass by those holes and they are not deep holes and are only there to be able to access the pipes below for repair. There being no further questions or comments,
Vincent Sawyer made a motion to approve Timber Pines to be moved down from Compliance Concerns compliance monitoring level and placed into Under Observation compliance monitoring level for 90-days with a status update to be provided to the Board at the February 4, 2026 Board Meeting. Cliff Henderson seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
e. Bridgeport Manor- Legal Default
Mendel Fischer reminded the Board that he is currently working to close the refinancing that has been pending. Fischer stated he was not present at the Board’s October 1, 2025 Board meeting due to the Jewish holidays, but stated that he will be moving forward with beginning construction on phase two of the property whether the refinancing transaction is able to close or not. Fischer stated he is aware that the Board is concerned with the property achieving an occupancy rate of 75% or higher, and out of a total of 636 units, 432 units are already renovated, with approximately 380 tenants on property. Fischer stated that permits have been pulled to begin the construction of phase two. Fischer stated the construction will begin with 46 units, which will bring the total number of renovated units to 478 units, which will allow the property to be 75% occupied if all renovated units are leased, which will meet the Board’s minimum occupancy requirement. Fischer stated that he is still working through his differences with the bank regarding pending refinancing and that conversation has been active, and he does believe the refinancing will close this month (November 2025). Fischer stated that is why he decided to commit to moving forward with beginning the construction of phase two at the Board’s September 3, 2025 Board meeting by allocating funding for that while waiting for the refinancing to close and work is anticipated to commence in the next two weeks. Fischer stated that the necessary demolition had previously been done for phase two and windows were installed, so construction will commence in the next two weeks with the interior renovations, which will include plumbing, electrical, mechanical, etc. and will be looking to bring this online according to the schedule that was submitted.
Townsend reported that, as has been previously reported during prior Board meetings, the occupied areas of this property have been maintained. Townsend reported he has seen workers present and some renovations being performed on some areas, but there is still a large portion of the property with unoccupied buildings that have areas of soffit, fascia boards, and work that needs to be done internally. Bryant stated that the project is currently at an 61% occupancy rate, and the Board staff recommends Bridgeport Manor to remain in legal default status as the refinancing approved by the Board at its June 4, 2025 Board meeting has not closed, and construction has not been completed.
Carpenter stated that this has been a very prolonged process, and it has been shared with this Board on numerous occasions that refinancing is needed to complete the renovation of the units on the property. Carpenter reminded the Board that this process goes back further than 24-months to a refinancing application that was approved at the Board’s June 7, 2023 Board meeting that was unable to close, the application was rendered void, and the process began again this year 2025, with approval of a refinancing application at the Board’s June 4, 2025 Board meeting. Carpenter stated that closings are always presented to the Board by the PILOT Lessee and their legal counsel as imminent, and anticipated in a couple of weeks, but it never happened. After looking at the history of this PILOT property, Carpenter stated that occupancy is still deficient and cannot improve until the renovations are completed. Carpenter stated his Firm would recommend the Board consider a drop-dead date for the loan to close, and when that date is reached, if the loan is not closed, then the approval would be rescinded. During that time, Carpenter stated there would also need to be a specific schedule submitted to the Board that would indicate how the PILOT Lessee intends to achieve the 75% minimum occupancy requirement. Carpenter stated that if the loan is not closed and the plan to reach compliance with the Board’s current policies and procedures is not accepted by the Board at the drop-dead date determined by the Board, that at that time, the Board would have all options available to it, including termination of the PILOT for non-compliance. Carpenter stated that the Board has worked cooperatively with the developer for an extended period of time, and while the PILOT Lessee is doing some work, it is not sufficient to come into compliance on a reasonable timeframe.
Buckner Wellford stated that he agrees with most of Carpenter’s assessment; he does believe that some work is being done and stated he had some questions regarding statements made in the Board’s October 1, 2025 Board Meeting Minutes. Wellford quoted those meeting minutes as follows: “...the PILOT Lessee...anticipates the Santander loan to close in early November 2025. Carney stated that the PILOT Lessee did provide a report to the Board staff that indicated construction would begin on four buildings now, and permits will be pulled on October 27, 2025 to begin the rehabilitation of those four buildings, which will be funded by the PILOT Lessee pending the closing of the Santander Loan.” Wellford asked if this is what has actually occurred. Knopf stated that this has happened. Carpenter asked Townsend to confirm this. Townsend stated that there are buildings that he has observed some work being done. Wellford stated that with that said, it seems the PILOT Lessee is doing what was committed, so he will give the PILOT Lessee credit that he used his own funds to move forward with that portion of the commitment, but the Board was also promised that the loan commitment would be closed in early November, and the reason for the delay that was provided at the October 1, 2025 Board meeting was the loan could not be closed prior to early November due to the Jewish holiday season. Wellford stated that the Board still does not have a satisfactory explanation for that, and he is torn and would like to hear feedback from other Board members concerning Carpenter’s recommendation of imposing a drop-dead date for the Board to consider.
Fischer stated that when he extended the loan with the current lender in September 2025, his rate went from 12% to 14%, and there is no one on his side that does not want to close this loan. Fischer stated that there is nothing on the actual bank side, but there are some third-party reports, specifically about the appraisal that he is going back and forth about the proceeds, and the last couple of weeks have been challenging. Fischer stated that he needs to close the refinancing loan by December 1, 2025, because if he does not, there will be a penalty imposed, and the penalty is severe. Fischer stated this is why he proposed intermediary financing at the September 3, 2025 Board meeting (which was approved by the Board), because he does not want to be in the situation of paying the penalty of the current lender if the Santander loan has not closed by December 1, 2025. Fischer stated that rescinding the Board’s approval will not help the property, and he would like to close the Santander loan today, but it just does not comply with what he needs it to in order to close. Fischer stated that at the same time, he has gone into his own pockets to address the construction concerns of the Board and has set certain milestones to get to the 75% minimum occupancy requirement of the Board. Fischer stated that the refinancing is one thing, but the 75% occupancy rate to get out of legal default status is a challenge because this is a larger property, and if it were a 100-unit property they would be there, but as it is 636 units, it takes more units to get there. Fischer stated that regarding tenant benefits, there are approximately 380 tenants receiving tenant benefits at the property, so if the PILOT were to be removed, that would be the equivalent to two or three other properties and that would not benefit anyone.
Carpenter stated that the reason the Board is here now with this property is because Fischer does do good work and the community needs this work, but there is a communications problem because the PILOT Lessee’s legal counsel stated at the Board’s October 1, 2025 Board meeting, although the Lessee was not in attendance, that everything had been approved, the lender had completed its site visit to the property in September 2025, and all that remained was the paperwork to get the Santander loan closed, and that was delayed due only to the Jewish holiday season; then today, Fischer is telling the Board that the loan may or may not be closed, but he will begin construction anyway, so the Board has no clarity on what the real facts and circumstances are with the Santander loan and the PILOT Lessees credibility is in question. Carpenter stated that the Board must be uniform in the way it oversees its policies and procedures, and while different projects have unique circumstances, the Board has shown good faith in working with Fischer and his team, but the back and forth is something that the Board cannot tolerate. Carpenter stated Fischer has said he wants to close the loan but asked if all approvals are in place, and the closing is only pending final closing documentation or are there other issues. Fischer stated that all the third-party reports were done in April 2025, but he had the appraisal redone, received approval for the refinancing from the Board in June 2025, Santander representatives performed a site visit on September 17, 2025, and then the Santander inspector did not turn in his report until last Thursday (October 30, 2025), that gave the final figures to go ahead.
Fischer stated that now there has been a little back and forth between him and his team and Santander, and he will have to make a decision with his team. Fischer stated that he wants to move ahead and Santander wants to move ahead, but he just wants to have the final ground number because he is wanting to move forward with the final loan at $32,500,000, and Santander wants to move forward at $29,800,000, so he needs to determine what decision he should make and see if he should try to push for another week or two, or if because he is under pressure from this Board to close by December 1, 2025, to go ahead and close the loan. Fischer stated it is more of mechanics, not an issue with the loan. Fischer stated that Santander produced one solution, but it is not the best solution for him because that solution would push the closing out to sometime at the end of December 2025 and he would like to satisfy his current lender today, so there is an imminent decision that he must make. Fischer stated that if he told Santander he is ready to close, the refinancing would likely be closed within ten (10) days, as all the paperwork and third-party reports are complete, and it is something he really wants to get done. Fischer stated that because he committed to the Board that he would continue to address this issue of occupancy and getting these buidlings up and running regardless of the refinancing, that is what he has been working on doing.
Vincent Sawyer asked if Fischer is stating that the timing of the closing of the loan will determine the loan amount due to some financial conditions or market conditions? Fischer stated that it has to do with one of the reports Santander has completed. Sawyer stated that it seems the timing of the closing is waiting until Fischer can get the best numbers he can. Fischer stated that it is not a timing issue, but an issue with the appraisal company coming back and adjusting certain numbers. Wellford asked if the Board were to give a deadline of December 1, 2025, if that would be a problem, or maybe it would help get it done. Fischer stated that it would not help him, because if it does not close by then, he would have to submit another refinancing application to the Board, which could take another several months, and by that point, the refinancing request may not be granted and he would really like to keep these two things separate. Cliff Henderson stated that if the Board were to designate a final date, he would not be supportive of December 1, 2025, because with the timing and the holiday season, there is a decent risk it will not close by that deadline. Henderson stated that as the Board will not have a January 2026 Board meeting, he would propose a “drop-dead” final deadline date of the Board’s February 4, 2026 Board meeting. Henderson stated that this would give the PILOT Lessee ninety (90) days to close this loan, and he does not see how Fischer survives keeping this property operating with a current loan at 12%-14% rate, and following that 90-day period, if the loan is not closed, other issues will come up at that point, and the Board would need to discuss at that point the viability of that entity being sustainable going forward. Henderson reiterated that he is supportive of moving a final deadline out to the Board’s February 4, 2026 Board Meeting to allow for any holiday or other delays that could come up, but the Board would absolutely know at the point that there is a different issue or problem if the Santander refinancing loan is not closed by that time. Monice Hagler stated she supports Henderson’s comments. Henderson stated that refinancing is one issue, but if it does not happen, this issue escalates to a different problem, and that would be the bigger thing the Board will have to discuss with the viability of this project going forward.
Cliff Henderson made a motion for Bridgeport Manor to be remain in legal default status, and the PILOT Lessee shall be granted until the Board’s February 4, 2026 Board meeting to close the Santander refinancing loan that was approved at the Board’s June 4, 2025 Board meeting, and if said refinancing loan is not closed by the February 4, 2026 Board meeting, the PILOT would be subject to termination at that time. Monice Hagler seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
f. Coronado Manor- Legal Default
Neil Knopf stated that most compliance issues have been taken care of with a few items that remain outstanding. Knopf stated that occupancy is stronger, and some of the larger issues that have been taken care of include the parking lot, some soffit and fascia damage, and there has been a lot of work that has gone into this property, as he believes reports show. Townsend reported that like Bridgeport Manor, the main areas that have been completed and are occupied have been well maintained and manicured. Unlike Bridgeport Manor, Townsend stated that Coronado Manor has had a lot more work done to the exterior of the property, including added playgrounds and common areas. Townsend stated there are still minor areas of soffit and fascia that need to be repaired, areas of unoccupied buildings and stairwells that need to be cleaned up and painted and soffit and fascia repairs remaining. Townsend stated he was able to witness through the windows into unoccupied units that there are still areas internally that need to be renovated as well, including flooring that needed to be installed, baseboards, ceilings, and bathrooms missing sinks. Stephanie Bryant stated that the property is 76% occupied. Townsend stated that ownership has mentioned getting a security gate at the front entrance of the property, and this property is laid out in a way that the property only has one entrance and exit, and the property has also experienced acts of vandalism and vandalism issues, but Townsend has observed security personnel present an on-site during his inspections. Townsend asked what the status of the onsite laundry facility is. Knopf stated that the status is the same for the laundry facility as it was when he last reported to the Board at the August 6, 2025 and September 3, 2025 Board meetings, and that the laundry room has been renovated and is still awaiting equipment. Knopf stated that other properties that have received equipment from the vendor, and he is going back and forth with the vendor on final touches to those items, and this is a third-party company that the PILOT Lessee is locked into a contract with. Bryant stated that Board staff recommends Coronado Manor to remain in legal default status as the internal construction is still not complete.
Welford stated that in his review, the laundry facility issue has lingered on since July 2025 of the PILOT Lessee waiting for the equipment, and that is a long time. Carpenter stated that the frustrating part is that the PILOT Lessee does just enough to have a report, but it is not completing or resolving the process. Carpenter stated that there has been a lot of internal oversight and external oversight from the Board and asked Corbin Carpenter to review with the current PILOT Compliance Deficiency Fee with the members of the Board. Corbin Carpenter stated that the Board adopted as part of its options during the revisions of the PILOT policies and procedures that were adopted at the Board’s March 5, 2025 Board meeting, a PILOT Compliance Deficiency Fee for situations like this when a PILOT property has remained in legal default status for an extended period of time, and due to the additional oversight expenses incurred by the Board for both internal and external monitoring and legal expenses, the Board is within its rights to approve a PILOT Compliance Deficiency Fee that shall be charged against the PILOT Lessee to compensate the Board for the extraordinary time and expenses incurred and/or expended on certain matters. Wellford asked what the parameters would be in terms of the allowable amount? Corbin Carpenter stated that the amount is to be determined by the Board on a case-by-case basis. Corbin Carpenter stated that Coronado Manor was issued a Notice of Legal Default on April 21, 2025, and had remained in legal default status for over six (6) months now, and Bryant would compile for the Board a list of the fees that have been assessed and time expended, and then present that to the Board at a future meeting, the Board would vote to approve an amount, and then that amount would be assessed to the PILOT Lessee. Wellford stated that these are fundamental things that affect the whole devlopment, referencing a non-functioning laundry facility for five (5) months, and he believes the Board should assess a fee that demonstrates that there are consequences to this, as this has been gone too long without a satisfactory explanation for it.
Fischer stated that the laundry facility is waiting on third-party vendors that he has a contract with, and the only way to get out of the contract is by suing the vendor. Fischer stated his legal counsel has sent legal letters to the vendor several times, but it takes this long, and this is a company that services this metropolitan area. Knopf stated that the vendor, CSC, is the largest vendor. Wellford stated that with a contract, there are rights, and it sounds like the vendor may be in breach of contract, but the concern is that the PILOT Lessee did not share this information with the Board, and that Board staff had to ask about the status, and now Fischer is sharing that demand letters have been sent to the vendor. Wellford asked Carney if demand letters have been sent to the vendor. Carney responded that the PILOT Lessee is using corporate counsel for that matter, and that the PILOT Lessee has mentioned CSC before, and this is not the first time this has come up. Knopf stated that demand letters is the only way the PILOT Lessee was able to get CSC to install the equipment at some of the other PILOT properties in the Lessee's portfolio, and CSC may be doing just enough for the PILOT Lessee to not be able to terminate the contract and push things further based on how their contract is written. Knopf stated that as long as CSC shows some sign of life within thirty (30) days, essentially the PILOT Lessee cannot get out of the contract without significant damages, and CSC started delivering some equipment on other properties to push things out and stated that other deliveries are scheduled. Knopf stated that if the PILOT Lessee decides to go with another vendor because CSC is sixty (60) days out on delivery, then the PILOT Lessee will be sued by CSC, so this is a work in progress to the point that the PILOT Lessee has received equipment on other properties, which does not help Coronado Manor, but it is the same vendor they continue to work with, as all contracts were signed at the same time. Fischer stated that he is using the largest company that services this area, and they could have used a smaller company, but was concerned if a smaller company would service the properties correctly.
Fischer stated that he would request that Coronado Manor be removed from legal default status and moved to a lower level because the occupancy is there, and the property is maintained, and although there is an issue with the laundry facility, but the playgrounds have been taken care of and the other tenant benefits are there, and the laundry facility is not operational due to a third-party. Fisher stated he wants the laundry facility to work because he will have revenue out of it that is a sure thing, but he worked with another laundry company at Scenic Hills. Knopf corrected Fischer and stated Scenic Hills is services by CSC, but there was another laundry company he reached out to that aid they could provide equipment within six (6) days.
Wellford stated that this information is only being shared because Board staff had to ask about this issue and put it on the table before the Board for the PILOT Lessee to explain this. Wellford stated that the PILOT Lessee is the one that is in legal default, and there is a mechanism for the Board to get reimbursed to some extent, particularly considering the time the Board has spent discussing this matter. Wellford stated that the PILOT Lessee could have explained this in a letter sent to the Board staff, or explained it to the Board compliance inspector, but there has now been an over five (5) month gap with this and he cannot believe that the contract between the PILOT Lessee and CSC does not allow the PILOT Lessee to recover for some assessment that the Board would make this is directly attributable to CSC’s failure to deliver the equipment, which is presumably called upon to be delivered in a reasonable time in the contract. Wellford stated that the Board has to pull information out of Fischer and his representatives every time they appear before the Board, and that is frustrating. Wellford stated that to prove the point that the Board means what it says, and to make developers in legal default more proactive about identifying the issues and to encourage developers to provide better explanation of the circumstances, Wellford recommended that the Board assess a $1,000 PILOT Compliance Deficiency Fee for the time and expense of the Board in dealing with the additional oversight of this matter, and the PILOT Lessee’s failure to provide a core function of the development of a functioning laundry facility since July 2025. Chairman Reid stated that he believes this fee is not reflective of the additional time and resources expended on the additional oversight of this project. Cliff Henderson stated he would like to see the total amount of fees that the Board has incurred, but he does agree with Wellford that the Board has had cases where they have worked with developers over a year that have worked out well and others that have not. Henderson stated that he believes the intent of the PILOT Lessee is genuine and the Lessee is trying to do the best it can, given the different circumstances, but at the same time, he believes there is manageable chaos around a lot of different things going on, and as discussed as prior Board meetings, the PILOT Lessee took on a lot when purchasing the properties included in this portfolio, and for the Board, it must determine if it feels the PILOT Lessee can salvage each property and make it successful within this interim time period. Henderson stated that while he appreciates the progress for Coronado Manor, it is just barely above the Board’s 75% minimum occupancy rate requirement, coming in today at 76% occupied, and he would recommend the property remain in legal default for an additional period of time to ensure that this progress in occupancy remains. Henderson stated that the PILOT Lessee must see that the Board and staff review of this portfolio takes a lot of time.
Fischer stated that he would be unable to attend the Board’s December 3, 2025 Board meeting because he will be traveling overseas, and he has not traveled the last six (6) months on the first Wednesday of each month because he must attend the Board meetings, but he knows that the burden is on him, and he thinks that today, he and his representatives were able to demonstrate by some of his properties returning to regular monitoring, that this is the conclusion he would like to get to on every PILOT property in his portfolio. Coming back to the discussion of Coronado Manor, Fischer stated that staying in legal default status is a major concern because they have achieved the minimum occupancy rate and taken care of other concerns, and the laundry facility is a concern, but he went with a major company by going with CSC because he knows the concerns with other companies of having functioning machines, but they would not be serviced properly, and there are other issues with other companies, such as money issues, which is why he chose CSC. Fischer stated that each time a demand letter is sent, CSC’s feedback is that equipment has been installed at other properties in this portfolio and additional installs will take time. Fischer stated that CSC also has concerns with the area that Coronado Manor is in, as it is a more challenging area that others, and there have been situations where someone has stolen the machine with the money in it in the area and CSC is taking longer to install equipment due to those concerns. Fischer stated that these concerns are challenged with security cameras and security patrols, and they know the challenges and are making the best of it. Monice recommended that Coronado Manor remain in legal default status and appear before the Board at its February 4, 2026 Board meeting with a PILOT Compliance Deficiency Fee to be considered upon review of expenses incurred. Wellford recommended that the Board consider assessing a $1,000 interim PILOT Compliance Deficiency fee today, with the option of reviewing the expenses incurred by the Board regarding the additional compliance oversight of Coronado Manor at the February 4, 2026 Board meeting, and consider a supplemental PILOT Compliance Deficiency fee at that time, and the Board will determine at the February 4, 2026 Board meeting when the $1,000 interim PILOT Deficiency Fee and any supplemental PILOT Compliance Deficiency Fee would be payable.
Howard Eddings, Jr. asked what the difference would be in the property remaining in legal default status versus moving it to a lower level of compliance observation in the compliance step process. Fischer stated that for financing purposes, no bank wants to see that a property is in legal default. Wellford asked if the PILOT Compliance Deficiency Fee is assessed at the legal default level, to which Carpenter confirmed, stating that a property being in a legal default status allows the Board its full range of options when reviewing a PILOT property, including termination of a PILOT if it is not in compliance. Carpenter stated that moving this property out of legal default status and to a lower step would mean the property would have to be placed back into legal default status for the Board to have a full range of options available to it. Eddings asked if moving the property to a lower level puts the Board in a different position long-term, to which Carpenter confirmed, which Eddings agreed he would not want to do at this time. Carpenter stated the challenge is that all of the PILOT Lessee’s statements are believed to be made in good faith, but there is no real progress being made, and it is a similar situation in listening to what CSC is doing to and telling them to keep delaying, which is the same thing they are doing to the Board. Carpenter stated that there is frustration on both sides, but the Board’s responsibility is to administer the policies and procedures of the PILOT program and other PILOT Lessee could make the same argument, and the Board has an obligation to be consistent, and at some point, time has run out, and that is where the Board is with these last three properties in this portfolio being discussed today. Carpenter stated that the properties that were discussed earlier in today’s meeting have done well and the staff recommendation, which the Board accepted, was to step those down, and the Board is not being unfair about this, and the PILOT Lessee has responsibilities and commitments that they must live up to. Carpenter stated he is not saying that the PILOT Lessee is not trying, but this portfolio has dominated the Board’s entire agenda today, and will continue to as long as the Board moves forward with further considerations, and every time there is a different reason, which could be considered reasonable, but the Board must move forward and the burden is on the PILOT Lessee to move it forward. Carpenter stated that if these issues were taken care of, there would be no travel schedules to consider, but the issues have not been taken care of, so the PILOT Lessee will be required to appear before the Board at a later date to address these ongoing issues. There being no further questions or comments,
Monice Hagler made a motion that Coronado Manor remain in legal default status and appear before the Board at its February 4, 2026 Board meeting, and accepted Buckner Wellford’s amendment to the motion that the Board assess a $1,000 interim PILOT Compliance Deficiency Fee today, with a supplemental PILOT Compliance Deficiency Fee to be considered and assessed at the February 4, 2026 Board meeting, at which time the Board will also determine a date when the Total PILOT Compliance Deficiency would be due and payable. Vincent Sawyer seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
g. Watkins Manor-Legal Default
Neil Knopf stated that with Watkins Manor, the PILOT Lessee’s final steps to be able to occupy were the Fire and Building inspections. Knopf stated that there have been interim Fire inspections, but the interim Fire Inspector in charge of this area has changed twice since he was before the Board last, and the Fire Inspector has also changed how they want certain things done. Knopf stated that inspectors were at the property the week of October 27, 2025, and stated inspectors were satisfied with everything, but there is still a final walkthrough required, which was scheduled for November 3, 2025. Knopf stated that he received a text message of the evening of November 2, 2025 that stated there was a special assignment assigned by Memphis Fire Department and the inspector would not be able to come until the following week. Knopf stated that the Building Inspector was scheduled for November 4, 2025, and the inspector has inspected the property in the past, together with the PILOT Lessee’s attorney, after the Environmental Court ordered the inspector to come to the property, and has stated that he was also satisfied, but must perform a final walkthrough. Knopf stated however, that the Building Inspector is unable perform a final walkthrough until after the Fire Inspector’s final walkthrough and passing of that inspection. Knopf stated that now that the Fire Inspector’s final walkthrough has been moved to the week of November 10, 2025, he has spoken with the Chief Building Inspector, who asked Knopf to give him a call once the Fire Inspection has been completed and passed, and as long as he is able, he would be there the following day. Townsend stated that he had nothing to add. Bryant stated that the property remains 0% occupied, as it has for the entire term of the PILOT, and the PILOT Lessee has had ninety (90) days to work through the bureaucracy that the Lessee stated was the issue at the Board’s August 6, 2025 Board meeting, and as there has been no progress or change, the Board staff recommends termination of the PILOT. Chairman Reid stated that as Watkins Manor’s PILOT Term began December 1, 2021, and there has now been almost four (4) years' time elapsed with no occupancy of the project. Carpenter stated that his Firm concurs with the Board staff’s recommendation. Carpenter stated that the PILOT Lessee has had approximately four (4) years to move this property forward, and although they are close, they are still unable to occupy the property, and based on the PILOT policies and procedures, Carpenter knows of no exception to go any further than the Board has already gone in attempting to keep this property in the PILOT program.
Fischer stated that while he understands where the Board is coming from, it would be a very bad decision for the neighborhood to terminate the PILOT. Fischer stated he cannot say that the Board is doing the wrong thing, but it is the wrong thing for the property and the neighborhood, and to take a property that will get reassessed with new taxes will be a burden and may turn into a blighted property again. Fisher stated that the property does have issues and there are a lot of things he will have to deal with consequently, and he understands what the Board’s policies and procedures are, and this is a long story with such a property, and he owns two properties in the area, including Scenic Hills and Timber Pines. Fischer stated that the Environmental Court has done all it can and is still pushing for this to be a viable property because if this property goes down, the North Watkins Road has a big issue because the properties down the block are not doing well and have changed hands quite a few times, the City has invested quite a bit of money into the library, and he does not believe the City would like to see this property go down as well. Fischer stated that he should have put more pressure on this property, and he knows when the Board looks at this portfolio, this is the one that stands out, and he is happy it is the last one on the agenda today so it did not put a bed taste out at the onset of today’s meeting, but other than those comments, he is speechless concerning this property.
Wellford stated that just so the record reflects, maybe it is shame on the Board that this PILOT was ever granted, but the Board did so because it believed the representations that were made. Wellford stated that records reflect the original construction completion date commitment was February 2023, revised to September 2023, revised to March 2024, revised to September 2025, and the Board’s policies and procedures are meaningless if the Board does not terminate this PILOT. Chairman Reid asked Monice Hagler, the longest serving Board Member, if she recalled ever seeing a PILOT property that has participated in the program for almost four (4) years with no occupancy, to which Hagler responded she has not. Chairman Reid stated that Board staff recommendation is to terminate this PILOT. There being no further questions or comments,
Howard Eddings, Jr. Made a motion to terminate the PILOT for Watkins Manor. Monice Hagler seconded, and the motion passed unanimously after proper roll call vote of the Board members.
Frank Stockdale Carney, Mendel Fischer, and Niel Knopf left the meeting.
Austin (A.T.) Harrison, Simeon Ike, and Tiffany Gray left the meeting.
Executive Directors Report
a. Trey McKnight reported that he attended the Shelby County PILOT Ad Hoc Committee community meeting on October 11, 2025. McKnight reported that there were not many people in attendance, but those that did attend were very attentive, listened, and asked questions. McKnight stated that he was the only attendee in terms of economic incentive organizations, and he participated with Commissioner Henri Brooks, her staff, and citizens of the community and ansered questions, and went through all types of workshops and all went well and he left there in an amicable way. McKnight stated he is unsure of what Commissioner Brooks’ next steps are, but he has been there every step of the way and answered questions of what could happen if PILOTs were removed. McKnight stated that if PILOTs were removed, that would destroy the PILOT program. Wellford asked for confirmation on which PILOT program. McKnight stated it would hurt the Board’s PILOT program in regard to building affordable housing. Wellford stated that it could hurt the Board’s program, but it would not destroy the program. McKnight agreed, stating that it would hurt the Board’s PILOT program greatly in terms of economic incentives.
b. McKnight reported that Meet and Greet event he hosted for Ralph Perry, President of THDA, in conjunction with the Tennessee Affordable Housing Coalition went well. McKnight reported there were approximately fourteen (14) developers in attendance, and the event went so well that Ralph Perry sent a hand-written letter thanking staff and the Board for everything that it does, and the event was fruitful. McKnight stated that many developers got to ask Perry questions directly and the event went well, and he believes the Board has a good working relationship with the THDA Board, and he will be working with them as much as possible moving forward.
c. McKnight reported that he attended the Economic Development Growth Engine (EDGE) Awards Breakfast on October 9, 2025, and thanked Howard Eddings, Jr. for his attendance as well. McKnight reported that the event went very well. McKnight stated that speakers spoke about economic development, where things are moving, and how it will be done moving forward.
d. McKnight reported that he continues to work with a new development corporation in Memphis, Stella Maris Development Corporation, that owns two (2) buildings in the medical district that includes 329 new units that ownership is looking to convert into affordable housing units. McKnight reported that the development team is looking at both Bond and PILOT options and attended the Meet and Greet event for Ralph Perry and was able to ask questions regarding THDA and the conversation was very fruitful.
e. McKnight reported that he has been added to Mayor Young’s bi-weekly meeting, which includes representation from this Board, EDGE, Downtown Memphis Commission (DMC), and all other Executive Directors meeting with John Zeanah and Mayor Young bi-weekly. McKnight stated that the last meeting this group had was very fruitful, and representatives were each discussing each program and how to hopefully move forward in terms of helping the City with affordable housing.
f. McKnight reported that he recently met with a new local minority developer in terms of looking at developing an additional 250 units at 640 Winchester Road. McKnight stated that this is a new young local developer, 37 years old, Trey Carter, and is looking to build 250 units at 640 Winchester, and he will continue to work with him to move that forward. Monice Hagler asked if these would be new construction or existing units. McKnight stated these would be newly constructed units. McKnight stated that he learned from THDA that the Bond program will be focused on existing units, so he will be leaning on Charles Carpenter and Corbin Carpenter for their direction on how to figure that out. Charles Carpenter stated that each year, THDA prepares a Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP), and it has been done for 2026, and the priorities remain the same as the 2025 QAP, in that with the 2026 QAP, that preservation is focused on in Round One, then in Round Two, the round opens up for new construction and other alternate plans, so that would be the way THDA handles that. McKnight stated that per Ralph Perry, Memphis will now be moving to the forefront in regard to assisting and helping with regards to any type of designation or help with THDA.
g. McKnight reported that the Tennessee Affordable Housing Coalition hired a new executive director and he was a part of the hiring process. McKnight stated that on February 23-24, 2026, there will be a Tennessee Affordable Housing Coalition meeting in Nashville, TN and he will be attending, there will be a hospitality room and he will let everyone know where that is located, and he will be inviting the Board and staff to that hospitality room.
h. McKnight reported that he continues to work with out-of-town developers of Hotel Indigo in downtown Memphis that the developers are investigating the possibility of converting to affordable housing, which could add approximately 120 units, if determined to be feasible. McKnight stated that each room would be converted into an apartment unit. Chairman Reid asked where downtown Hotel Indigo is located. Vincent Sawyer stated it is located at Third Street and Court Avenue. McKnight reported that the developer’s names are Matt and Chip out of Atlanta and he continues to work with them to see how the Board can assist. McKnight stated that he has spoken to Mayor Young about the project, and he is in favor of Hotel Indigo being converted to affordable housing units. McKnight reported that ownership is losing approximately 6-figures annually with regard to hotel proceeds.
i. McKnight reported that he will be presenting to Downtown Memphis Commission (DMC) on November 13, 2025 regarding the Board’s programs and economic incentives. McKnight stated that he will be presenting, along with EDGE and DMC, and hosts are expected to have between 30-40 attendees. McKnight stated that he would send this information to the Board and welcomed Board members to attend. McKnight stated that he was a presenter at this same event two years ago in a different role, and the event was very well attended and very well done.
j. McKnight reported that he has been working with Cliff Henderson on putting together a Request for Quote (RFQ) for the Board’s website, and it has been finished and will be going out in the coming days to approximately seven candidates. McKnight stated that as the RFQ was finished on November 4, 2025 he will be sending it out first thing November 6, 2025, and if the Board has any additional candidates they would like for the RFQ to be sent to, please let him know. McKnight stated he has already spoken with several people regarding recommendations for local and/or minority owned businesses to send an RFQ to regarding the Board’s website.
Chairman Reid asked that McKnight send something out to Board members concerning the presentation on November 13, 2025 so that if Board members have availability to attend, they will have the information. McKnight confirmed he would do that. There were no questions or comments.
Operations Report
Stephanie Bryant presented the Operations Report as follows:
a. Review of Compliance Oversight for October 2025
Bryant began by reminding the Board of the four (4) levels of additional compliance oversight that were put into place by staff in 2024 and this report will review movement of certain properties within these four (4) levels: (i) Under Observation, (ii) Compliance Concerns, (iii) Non-Compliance, (iv) Legal Default. Bryant reported as follows:
October 2025 Compliance Review for November 5, 2025 Board Meeting
Under Observation:
Two (2) PILOT properties placed in “Under Observation” status from regular monitoring during October 2025:
i. Macon Manor- declining occupancy (92% in Q2 2025 to 77% in Q3 2025)
ii. River City Heights-declining property conditions
Compliance Concerns:
Updates to recent properties previously placed in Compliance Concerns:
i. Residences at Lakeview- walkthrough performed October 29, 2025; Cure plan to be submitted no later than November 4, 2025
ii. University Place-Phases II & III- Cure plan was submitted timely on October 6, 2025 and staff has observed progress, and has been in discussions with ownership concerning a potential upcoming renovation of the projects
iii. Villages at Harrison Creek- meeting request has been sent to ownership and is pending scheduling
Notice of Non-Compliance: Five (5) PILOT properties were placed in “Non-Compliance” status during October 2025 and Notices of Non-Compliance are in the process of being drafted and issued to PILOT Lessees:
Feels Like Home Senior Living Residences- Lack of progress with property rebuild following December 29, 2022 Fire to property; Walkthrough performed on September 17, 2025 and no cure plan was submitted by October 5, 2025, nor quarterly occupancy reports for Q2 2025 or Q3 2025 submitted following numerous requests.
All four (4) PILOT properties in Shemano’s portfolio have been placed into “Non-Compliance” status for declining property conditions and no progress shown following ongoing progress reports of concerns shared with ownership and current management. Staff received a cure plan on August 27, 2025 and following the initial sixty (60) days for the PILOT Lessee to progress through Phase one of the cure, there has been no progress observed:
i. Abington Apartments
ii. Country View Apartments
iii. Jamesbridge Apartments
iv. Lakes at Epping Way
Legal Default:
Sterling Townhomes was placed in “Legal Default” status following the Board’s October 1, 2025 Board meeting, and the PILOT Lessee will appear before the Board at the December 3, 2025 Board meeting
b. HEHFB Suite 1120 Preliminary Floor Plan Update
Bryant stated that she has been in communication with Henry Turley Company representatives concerning the proposed renovation to the Board’s office suite. Bryant stated that Henry Turley Company has selected A&R Construction as the contractor for the construction piece of the proposed renovation. Bryant stated she has completed her review of final furniture finish options, and she has received some preliminary cost estimates for the construction from A&R Construction, and furniture proposals from the design team at The Crump Firm. Bryant stated that she is reviewing alternate furniture options for cost savings and plans to put the information together to be presented to the Finance Committee for review, followed by a presentation to the Board.
There were no other questions or comments.
Monice Hagler left the meeting.
Finance Committee Report
Cliff Henderson presented the financial results for the month ended September 30, 2025. After discussion,
Howard Eddings, Jr. moved for acceptance of the Finance Committee Report for the month ended September 30, 2025, properly seconded by Vincent Sawyer, and the motion passed unanimously after a proper roll call vote of the Board members.
Strategic Planning Committee Update
Cliff Henderson began by introducing Mike Humes, the consultant engaged to assist the Strategic Planning Committee and Board, and stated that Humes will be passing out a review of his work for the month of October 2025. Henderson stated that this is the second month the Humes has been operating with the Strategic Planning Committee and Board staff. Henderson reminded the Board that the strategy that this committee is working on is intended to be a discovery period for the Board as it thinks about some key things that are in development. Henderson stated that since the August 6, 2025 Board meeting when Doug McGowen, Staley Cates, and Jason Mulligan presented to the Board, Meridiam, Ting, and mStreet are all geared up and rolling things out and Humes will review some of that, but Henderson stated that he thinks the Board made the right decision to get out and get involved, and Humes has made official contact with mStreet, who will be the project manager, the epicenter, for everyone involved in the fiber initiative; this includes Memphis City Council, Ting (Internet Service Provider), MLGW, Meridiam, Congruex, Protech, and others. Henderson stated that mStreet is the entity that the Board needs to be connected with, and Humes has successfully integrated the Board with mStreet.
Henderson stated that the next step will be defining digital equity, as each organization has used that term separately, but this will be a big step for the Board to look at for the future in how it looks at Wi-Fi, digital equity, and what that means for residents of PILOT properties, and how the Board will look at the possibility of adjusting its tenant benefits in the future. Henderson stated that this discovery period is preparing things for the future, but right now in this discovery period, there are no decisions being made, and all of this work is fact finding, due diligence, and gathering information. Henderson stated that Humes is providing a weekly update to the Strategic Planning Committee, and he anticipates more information being reported to the Board in the next few months. Henderson invited other members of the Strategic Planning Committee to provide additional comments.
Vincent Sawyer stated that he has been very impressed with the progress thus far and is looking forward to Humes’ report to the Board today. Buckner Wellford stated that he will circulate to the Board later the Smart City Ordinance that all this emanates from, which was adopted in 2023, that ultimately created a fund of $3.5 million the mStreet is working with because the City will basically pay for half the cost of connection for up to 10,000 homes, and mStreet has to pay the other half, and then after that, mStreet must pay 100% of the connectivity cost for all the low-income connections. Wellford stated that this is the basis of where the Board is coming in and must determine what is the Board’s role, which is the purpose of this discovery period so that the Board can determine what its role is, and how can the Board get the PILOT properties to the head of the line in that roll out as best it can, and then possibly working with some of the other organizations to help some of the residents of PILOT properties get educated on and start to use these services. Henderson stated that mStreet is under contract with Memphis City Council and the City of Memphis to deliver the rollout and to get 85% of the City of Memphis covered by Ting, but there are also commitments in terms of how many low-income residents get access to this. Henderson stated that the reason mStreet would like to partner with the Board is because of the alignment of low-income housing residents, and mStreet can go through the Board to help cover some of these goals that they are required to meet, so that is where there is alignment.
Humes began by referencing the Smart Memphis Fiber Overview diagram, which was presented to the Board at its August 6, 2025 Board meeting. Humes stated that this diagram includes all the players withing the Smart Memphis Fiber Overview: The City of Memphis, who is contractually obligated; mStreet, formerly Blue Suede, will build this fiber network out; MLGW will serve as the infrastructure; Meridiam is the investor who is investing $850 million for this fiber buildout, and are the ones at risk; Ting is the Internet Service Provider (ISP), and there are options for other ISPs, but right now the partner is Ting; Congruex is the engineering and construction company that is building the huts, which will be described later today; Protech is the Internet Integration that is responsible for the street-to-home connection and is responsible for delivering the fiber on behalf of Ting to the consumer; and Post Road Foundation is the entity that is independent of all these parties, and their focus is on digital inclusion. Humes stated that right now, the market rate for Ting for regular or market rate housing is $90/month, which is 2 GB of upload and download speed, which is twice the speed of what any other provider is able to provide in this marketplace. Humes stated that AT&T has a 1GB upload and download speed that he has personally, and he rarely ever sees it get to that, so this would be the highest speed smart fiber deployed today. Humes stated that there are also some elements within mStreet’s contractual obligations around digital equity inclusion and device acquisition, so mStreet is partnering in certain areas and working together ideally. Humes shared a link to that is a public link that mStreet has that is delivered by Metro Fiber Map, and a user of this map is able to toggle on this map between what has been constructed, what is under construction, what is being designed, and what is planned.
Humes shared a second link that he created taking all that data and putting in all the PILOT property addresses, and it is now a smart interactive map so that on Google Earth, one is able to where all the huts are, when they are coming online, and which properties under the Board’s PILOT program are in those areas. Humes stated that this is now where he is working with mStreet, and it is much more costly for mStreet to go from single resident to single resident, so what is attractive to mStreet in working with the Board is mStreet can do one fiber drop and connect to hundreds of units. Humes explained that a hut is essentially a small data center that will be constructed on City-owned property. Humes stated that two (2) huts have been completed, Hut 2 and Hut 7, which are available to see on the map link, and Hut 1 and Hut 10 should be completed by the end of 2025. Humes stated that once a hut is constructed, that is when Ting will execute a consumer marketing plan, so whatever geography that covers, Ting will then go door-to-door and connect with residents, and then Protech will run the street-to-home connection. Humes reported that out of the Board’s entire PILOT portfolio, sixteen (16) right-of-entry (ROE) forms have been signed, and of those sixteen, one (1) Alco property and two (2) The Works properties have agreements secured to deliver. Humes stated that The Works development known as Northside Square will have fiber delivered to every unit once it is constructed in approximately January 2026, and the other The Works property is a senior complex that is also new construction currently being developed. Humes stated this this concludes the update, but it is primarily focused on getting ahead of this fiber opportunity so that the Board does not look four years down the road to see PILOT properties were not part of this deployment. Humes stated that PILOT properties are now at the front of the line with mStreet, Protech, MLGW, and City Engineering, ensuring PILOT properties are a priority. Henderson stated that this is a four (4) year rollout, and the process is in year one, with an estimated 25%-30% of connections anticipated to be deployed within the first year of the program, with additional gradual deployments throughout the next three (3) years of this process. Henderson stated the mStreet is being monitored by Memphis City Council on meeting those deployment schedules and also making sure that access to targeted residents and also digital equity commitments are being met. Humes stated that in the contracts, there are separate percentages that mStreet must meet every year to get income qualified properties so that it does not allow mStreet to automatically focus on market rate but goes to income-qualified mapping for the year.
JP Townsend left the meeting.
Howard Eddings, Jr. asked if the rollout with Post Road Foundation touching base with communities, and if the strategy is to pursue those communities or those users where the platform is apartments and densely populated areas, how does this group plan to touch the communities that may not have a lot of apartment units, but have low-income families living in those communities that are not in the PILOT program or the Board’s purview. Humes stated that his focus has been solely on the Board’s PILOT portfolio of properties, but mStreet has that requirement and Post Road Foundation has that requirement to deal with income-qualified single-family housing. Wellford stated that Post Road Foundation's objective is to go to low-income across the City, but this committee is focused on ensuring that PILOT properties are part of the first deployment to the extent that the Board can find good ways to work with them with some of the fund balance and/or other ways such as through Tenant Benefits. Wellford stated this is a way to prioritize PILOT properties to provide a beta test to see if the connectivity is there, and get tenants educated on how to use the service, and this could lead to future initiatives such as temporary subsidies or offering incentives for passing certain education and training courses, but that would be into the future.
Henderson stated that there are a lot of things to frame up for the Board to consider when things get to that point, but he does not want to see the Board get caught flat-footed because if this committee does not do this work now, someone else will be coming to the Board requesting funds for infrastructure for this to do this on PILOT properties and the Board would not know the legitimacy of those claims at that point. Henderson stated that Wellford touched on some of this, but what the committee is learning so far is that there are a lot of options of what does digital equity mean, because there is the infrastructure, as Humes described, having the rollout of services and getting the connection from the street to the property, then getting the Internet Service Provider in place. Henderson stated that then there is the work of determining if the tenant has a device, and if so, does the tenant know how to use the device and service and get the benefit from it, so there is a whole other side of this where there is a catch-up of a swath of residents, and this is the best thing for the city, but there is a catching-up on what some people have had access to or had the benefit of for the last 25 years, and that is the issue is how to catch people up on that, and this is where the Board needs to be in a good position in order to make the best decisions on behalf of the residents and for what the Board has been given responsibility for that goes along with that.
Charles Carpenter asked based on the projected timetable, while the committee is in a diligence period and coordinating with other stakeholders, when does the committee estimate that the Board would need to make a decision as to the deployment of assets. Henderson stated that this will likely cumulate into an off-site strategy discussion because he does think that it gets into tenant benefits, and whether a property owner providing free Wi-Fi to a PILOT property is something the Board would consider requiring going forward, and if so, does the Board work with mStreet on a subsidized amount for a certain period of time. Henderson stated that right now, Ting offers a low-income resident rate of $40/month for 2GB upload and download speeds, which is great. Henderson stated that the question would be does the Board go and work with Ting to broker a deal on behalf of PILOT properties for a two (2) year period so that residents have the ability to have access to it and get used to it. Henderson stated that the ideal scenario would be for people to view this as a new utility cost in the future like water, and it becomes important enough that people make access for it in their budgets as they go forward, but the immediate thing is that we know that is not going to be possible for everyone, so how do you get people to move forward because this is a key for health, education, and everything else that is being discussed. To answer Carpenter’s question, Henderson stated that he looks for there to be an update at the Board’s February 4, 2025 Board meeting that will lay out where things are then, discuss with the Board whether to do an off-site meeting to begin framing some of this information and data up, and he believes at that point, the committee will have a better understanding of where mStreet is with digital equity, and we want to define what digital equity means for the Board and what is means for Tenant Benefits for new applicant coming before the Board, and how to possibly retro-fit for the existing portfolio. These are some of the elements that must be framed up for the Board to digest in order to make decisions in how it positions. Humes stated that the Alco ROEs that are under contract with mStreet, Alco is covering that cost, so it is not being put on the resident. Humes stated that Alco negotiated a lower fee with mStreet for $20/unit, but Alco is covering the cost for every resident.
Corbin Carpenter asked who would be responsible for any maintenance and repair costs that may be forthcoming in the future. Humes stated that would be Ting’s responsibility as the ISP, just like AT&T or Comcast at a residence. Wellford stated that this is the challenge also is that the Board does not want to do something that would disadvantage some developers compared to others, but he agrees with Henderson on the timeframe given that the committee is still gathering a lot of information and some of the different players that have been identified are at different stages of being able to explain what they are doing or sharing their information, which is part of the problem. Henderson stated that this is why the committee wants to ensure that it lays out what is being done and do a good amount of due diligence for the Board. Henderson stated that in considering security in relation to this fiber rollout, there is the consideration of A.I. enabled cameras and from earlier discussions of security gates being hit by residents, an A.I. enabled camera could be placed at that location and could be linked into the Memphis Police Department Command Center, and this is just one example of once the Board starts thinking about what this fiber infrastructure enables in the future, there is the security piece, the education, the health piece, and others.
Henderson stated that Humes has not discussed this yet, but there will be a lot of different non-profits that are doing things in the community that are willing to partner with the Board that will not cost anything, but it is about connecting through the Board. Henderson stated that this is why the Board’s website will be such an integral part of how it might play for the Board in the future. Henderson stated that there are a lot of things that once they are framed and prepared, it will be a buffet for the Board to look at and decide how it goes, but again, no decisions are being made now, and it is just a period of sorting these things out so that the information can be digested as a Board. Eddings stated that he is trying to work out the process and how it works with the end user that the Board serves that will ultimately benefit from this, and it is a true benefit, but in his experience of putting in high-speed internet and in dealing with the families and some of the kids who come to Red Zone every day, their home internet connections are generally tied to their phone. Eddings asked how this is measured or how is the need quantified for access to a phone because the kids cannot use their phones, even as a device for accessing the internet, unless they have Wi-Fi, but the parents have the phone tied to a carrier. Eddings asked if the user would be able to have access to a phone if you have Ting. Humes stated yes, they would, but the services would be separate, so the user may have a Verizon phone using Ting fiber. Eddings asked how that would work if the user were at work or at school and not near the hut; how would that work for a typical phone that would work from one of the carriers. Humes stated that it would be through the device carrier whose plan the user has and would be paid for separately, but with fiber to the unit, that would reduce the phone carrier cost because the amount of data needed would be reduced and paid for on a consumption basis so that it can reduce cell phone charges each month and the user would not have to use their hotspot at home with fiber to the unit. Sawyer stated that it does not replace a Verizon bill, but it replaces a Comcast bill, for example. Henderson stated that he believes that Ting has a cell phone plan that may be rolled out as a bundle. Humes stated that Ting has this option in a couple of other markets. Eddings stated that it is important because he has kids that come to Red Zone that will hold their phone up to the window of the building after leaving to call an Uber. Eddings stated that this is what is happening in Orange Mound, but he is not familiar with what is happening in other areas, but he believes it is a microcosm of what is happening around the city.
Humes stated that the first application that was presented to the Board today, Hub North, LP, that the developers had already thought about Wi-Fi and fiber pre-construction, but the last group that the Board reviewed its portfolio of seven (7) properties, the developer did not mention Wi-Fi or fiber. Humes stated that they will have to consider this fiber rollout once it gets deployed, and it is a tenant benefit that is significant, and there are tens of partners across the city already doing great work, and now it is just getting the focus on residents in the PILOT properties, instead of overlooking them or looking at them broadly as part of the city. Humes stated that if the Board can bring these partners to the table at no cost to the Board to deliver their programming, that benefits the residents directly. Wellford stated that this started with the Smart City ordinance, and then Memphis 3.0 was built, and this is all built around land use concepts and they have identified these sort of anchor locations that are land use, not residential, and a lot of the fiber rollout is actually built around that map, which does not necessarily bleed over to where some of the /board’s PILOT properties are located, and that is part of this conversation. Wellford stated that if the Board is not included in the area, what does the Board need to do to work with the City and the players and get the Board’s PILOT properties included in the area so that the rollout is either happening quicker than it otherwise would or where it is not presently planned to rollout at all. Sawyer asked if Eddings' concern is that this may not help residents outside the home or unit. Eddings stated that it is a concern and what is happening on the streets every day with digital inclusion and the need for lowering the cookies at that level. Eddings stated what he did was go with the high-speed internet and fiber optics and spend a little more money on the front end. Henderson stated that he was able to research it, and Ting will have a mobile option for $10/month is a resident enrolls in their internet service, so there are different offerings and things that are coming and so many options, which is what the Board will need to sort out. Eddings stated that there are not a lot of PILOT properties in Orange Mound and he is generally concerned about Orange Mound right now, so he is trying to figure out is this is something he can take to the community and if so, how is it benefitting the community and what is the true benefit based on the reality of what they need. Eddings stated that kids are not necessarily going to McDonald’s or Burger King to download documents anymore as much as being unable to use their phone to call their parent because there is no Wi-Fi, so this is a critical need that may or may not be addressed in this rollout. Henderson asked Humes to connect Steve Willoughby with Eddings. Humes agreed, stating that Willoughby is the individual employed by mStreet who is focused on digital inclusion and equity, and he also is working with Post Road Foundation to make sure they are working together and prioritizing. Humes stated that this is an agreement with the city, so the city has to pay attention to the development as a whole. Humes stated that he is fully connected with MLGW because then entirety of this fiber infrastructure is going on thier poles and conduit, so mStreet is not building new infrastructure to deploy fiber, 100% is on MLGW assets, and there are fees that have been waived to help mStreet in that regard that otherwise MLGW and the City would be charging for use of conduit and public right of way, so the costs have been reduced, but Meridiam is investing $850 million in Memphis. There were no further questions or comments.
New Business
There was no new business.
Chairman Reid stated that the next regular meeting of the Board is scheduled for Wednesday, December 3, 2025 @ Noon. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned by the Chairman at 2:14 p.m.