12/01/05, 8:00 A.M.

Pursuant to the e-mail notification dated November 21, 2005, the consolidated November / December Heartland Apartment Association Board of Directors meeting was held at the above stated date and time at the HAA offices, 2405 Grand, Suite 106, Kansas City, MO 64108.

Board members present were: Doug Price, Lee Harris, Jim Beverlin, Bill Charcut, Jim Adams, Rick Oddo, and Dennis Watts. Also present were Mary Birch, Kay Wolf, John Blatz, and Sam Alpert. (Chris Erdley, Jerry Miller, Ward Katz, Ken Riedemann, and Ralph Lewis were absent.)

Doug Price called the meeting to order.

MARY BIRCH (IN OPPOSITION TO KS TABOR)- After providing a brief background on prior presentations from the Americans for Prosperity, the primary proponents of the Kansas TABOR constitutional amendment, Sam Alpert introduced Mary Birch, who lobbies on behalf various Kansas Chambers of Commerce, to present the opposing view. Ms. Birch set forth a position that TABOR would have a negative effect on representative governance by forcing municipalities to relinquish home rule discretion in matters involving adequate funding for the provision of "basic services" and the inevitable need to grow government spending on a pace exceeding the rate of inflation. The premise is that elected officials are better qualified than the voting public to decide these matters. It was further stated that the Colorado experience, the national TABOR model, has failed to achieve the promised better governance principals on which the measure was originally based. Members present engaged in a brief Q&A exchange with Ms. Birch, after which she departed the meeting.

KAY WOLF (KS REPRESENTATIVE, 21st DISTRICT)- Kay Wolf commented on her philosophy, to a great degree in agreement with Mary Birch, that the overriding concern with TABOR is the potential adverse effect it would have on representative governance. While claiming to be a "pro-business" legislator, as a freshman state representative, she is still in the process of learning basic protocol.

KANSAS HB 2321 - Ms. Wolf was asked to support this industry initiative to require municipalities to issue economic impact statements to justify the adoption of any new impact or user fee.

Members present engaged in a brief Q&A with Ms. Wolf, after which she departed the meeting.

The minutes of the last meeting on 10/27/05, which had been previously circulated, were reviewed and approved by those present.

JOCO WASTEWATER - Lee Harris and Sam Alpert reported that the appeal to our industry coalition partners to sign a previously circulated joint communication to the JOCO BOCC and WaterOne is gaining support. To date, in addition to HAA, signatures from BOMA, IREM, CUC, and AAKC had been secured. Efforts were underway to obtain additional support from the KS Restaurant and Hospitality Association, HBA, KCRAR, and the Builders Association. Sam Alpert had met with BOCC Commissioner Dave Lindstrom, who had expressed a desire to encourage greater cooperation between JWD and WaterOne. It was agreed that lobbying of the members of both the BOCC and WaterOne should proceed as we simultaneously continue to secure additional industry support. Letters would be officially circulated for signature and submitted to both utility boards as soon as possible….. as quickly as we can make the final determination of which organizations are prepared to sign on.

CRITICAL FINANCIAL MODELING- Sam Alpert reported that he had been in discussions with a Grubb & Ellis broker, Brent Arensberg, who has affiliated with the HAA and offered his firm's resources to help develop some detailed economic financial models intended to inform and advise municipalities on sound economic development public participation "cost benefit".

KCMO FIRE INSPECTION FEES - Sam Alpert reported that subsequent to the last HAA Board meeting, the Jackson County Circuit Court handed down a decision that effectively struck down city ordinances that required "fire inspection certificates" for all KCMO businesses. The decision went on to require that the city refund all fees previously collected that were associated with the issuance of the inspection certificates or "certificates of compliance", as well as to order the city to pay all reasonable attorneys' fees incurred on behalf of the plaintiffs. The city has made the decision to appeal the decision, as it views the case as a potential landmark decision; and in that this is a constitutional challenge, the city is not required to post bond as would have been the situation in any other instance. The city has filed motions with the court to modify the decision with regard to the findings of federal unconstitutionality, severability of specific provisions of the affected ordinances, and greater billing detail for the determination of reasonable attorneys' fees. The later is being contested by Lathrop & Gage on the basis that much of the detail being requested by the city contains proprietary and confidential legal strategy. The trial judgment will not become "final" until the Court has ruled on these motions, which should occur before the end of 2005. The city , as the appellant, will file the initial brief and will also reply to the plaintiff's response brief. An oral argument (no more witness testimony) will be scheduled before the Court of Appeals for the Western District of Missouri. A decision from the Western District of Missouri should be forthcoming approximately 10-13 months after the filing of the appeal. The Court of Appeals decision appeal can be sought before the Missouri Supreme Court (the end of the line), which only considers approximately 2% of all cases that are submitted. If the MO Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, a decision would probably be handed down within 9-13 months after the Court of Appeals decision. In rare circumstances the Supreme Court may choose to directly hear an appeal of the trial court, which would affectively bypass the Court of Appeals step. While no fees for the inspection certificate will be collected during the term of the litigation, pending a final court order, the plaintiffs will continue to fund the litigation.

KCMO RENTAL UNIT REGULATION TASK FORCE- Sam Alpert and Doug Price reported that the KCMO Rental Unit Regulatory Task Force continues to seek constructive solutions without penalizing good operators. There appears to be growing agreement among the participants that rental unit licensing, routine frequent codes inspections, and associated fees should not be the primary focus of the task force. They (both the city staff and the task force) are generally in favor of taking a more global approach to neighborhood preservation and the most efficient utilization of available resources to address "blight" resulting from neglect of both occupied home owners and absentee landlords. This is in addition to ensuring that minimum habitation codes standards are being properly enforced. There will be a task force recommendation to institute a standing oversight committee comprised of public stakeholder representatives including landlords, neighborhoods, churches, and codes officials.

KCMO BUSINESS LICENSE- Sam Alpert reported that the business license issue had been put on hold while a new KCMO Finance Department staffer works to convene a task force charged with retooling the occupational licensing statute originally enacted in the early 1900s. There doesn't seem to be any active effort on the part of the city to collect contested fees from "passive owners".

The next regular meeting of the HAA Board of Directors is scheduled to be held on Thursday, January 26, 2006, 8:00 a.m. at the HAA offices, 2405 Grand, Suite 106, KCMO.

There being no further business to come before the Board of Directors, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:45 a.m.