Council approves revised NOFA awards after heated debate, splits remaining funds among three projects

The Stockton City Council narrowly approved a revised package of housing awards late Wednesday, voting 4–3 to reallocate remaining notice-of-funding-available (NOFA) gap dollars among three projects after an extended public hearing.

The council’s decision funds a downtown workforce housing project often referred to as the "Bridal/Bricks" development, authorizes a $1,000,000 city commitment to Alicia’s Place (a proposed conversion of an existing motel into permanent supportive housing for veterans), and directs the remainder of the available pool to Delta Community Development’s Danny Drive senior housing campus. Councilmembers attached a two‑year milestone requirement: projects that have not made specified progress (including breaking ground or securing committed funding) will face de‑obligation of the city allocation.

Why it mattered: Council staff had recommended a different mix of awards based on a formal scoring process and an AI-assisted cross‑check. Several council members backed staff’s recommendation; others and some public speakers pressed for immediate, shovel‑ready projects that could deliver housing quickly. The debate included concerns about developer readiness, reliance on competitive tax credits, and a pending investigation tied to one applicant that several councilmembers cited as a reason for caution.

What council did: After applicants presented their proposals and dozens of residents took public comment, Councilmember Veil Pudua moved to fund the Bridal project for the full gap (the motion as amended included a downtown bridge/Bricks allocation of roughly $4.4 million) and to allocate $3.1 million for Alicia’s Place; the motion was amended and reallocated in closed discussion and carried 4–3. The council recorded the outcome as “motion carries 4 to 3.”

Applicants and advocates responded. Jeremy Hoffman, COO of Zen Development Consultants (developer/consultant on the Bridal project), emphasized that the Bricks proposal is permit‑ready and designed to deliver workforce units "half the cost" of typical affordable projects and to move quickly: "This project is permit ready and half the cost," he told the council. Supporters argued the Bricks proposal would add walkable downtown housing for workers and spur economic activity; veterans’ advocates urged support for Alicia’s Place as a life‑saving source of supportive housing.

Opponents and caution: Several council members and community speakers warned against awarding large city sums to projects that lack final underwriting or secured state awards. Vice Mayor Lee and others pressed whether the city should demand firmer evidence of funding stacks before commitments are made. Concerns about perceived conflicts and a prior investigative referral surfaced during the hearing; the mayor denied having been contacted by prosecutors about any alleged wrongdoing.

What’s next: Council set administrative conditions: city staff were directed to add milestone reporting and a two‑year limit so funds that don’t produce progress can be returned to the housing pot. Staff also flagged the city’s plan to publish the full funding commitments and to bring co‑applicant authority for state Homekey applications back to council if required.

The vote did not end the broader debate about process: multiple councilmembers said they want clearer scoring, better requirements for shovel‑readiness in future NOFAs, and added transparency in how staff communicates award decisions. The city manager and housing staff said they will return with any required contract documents and implementation steps and will track milestones for each project.

Outcome recorded: Motion carries 4–3. No arrests, permits or contracts were signed at the meeting; funding allocations are subject to standard closing conditions and subsequent administrative steps.