Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAffordable Housing Board - Minutes - 05/07/1998• 0 CQ4�,_V CITY OF FORT COLLINS AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD Meeting Minutes May 7, 1998 Bob Browning, Chair Joanne Greer, Vice Chair Chuck Wanner, City Council Liaison The meeting of the Affordable Housing Board was called to order by Vice Chair, Joanne Greer, beginning at 4:05 p.m., at 281 North College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members present included: Sylvie Glass, Kay Rios, Sue Wagner. Bruce Croissant arrived later. Staff present: Ken Waido, Ann Watts, and Joe Frank. The meeting was called to order without a quorum. Public discussion The question was presented if the issue regarding rebate and special districts had been decided and Mr. Waido explained the Board's recommendation to Council. Old Business TRAC Update Mr. Waido informed the Board that TRAC is still not closed. The Housing Authority has initiated foreclosure proceedings. The official deadline given TRAC by the Housing Authority was last Friday. The TRAC Board members did not want to see the project go through foreclosure, therefore, they were granted five more days to conduct a board meeting, which was Tuesday night. Mr. Waido noted this is hearsay information. The Housing Authority did extend the deadline from Friday to noon on Wednesday. Since the Housing Authority has the note from First National Bank, Shelly Stephens, Director, instructed their attorney to file papers to foreclose. Assuming papers get filed this week, there is a 45 day redemption period where TRAC could come up with the money and pay back the Housing Authority; if they fail to do so, Housing Authority owns the project. Public Awareness Subcommittee Report Ms. Greer reported all are interconnected on E-mail now. Working on ideas so when there is a meeting, pictures and written material can be presented. Ms. Rios also distributed Affordable Housing Board Meeting Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 2 evaluations from the participants of the Affordable Housing Luncheon. Included is a letter, result of a brainstorming session, to analyze and continue momentum from the luncheon, and follow up on some concerns and ideas. It was noted the Affordable Housing Board could pick up on the area under education, i.e., establish a database or list that could provide the location of available resources, guidebook that homebuilders use, videotape that the City has put together, etc. The County has a number of different documents where they have done needs assessment and surveys. Ms. Rios commented the County said it could be a link to their web site as well. It was the general consensus this would be an appropriate area for the Board to look at, and that it fit within the goals and objectives of the Public Awareness Committee. Ms. Greer suggested the subcommittee look this information over, discuss it, see how they can fit it in with what they are doing, and get back with the Board. After Mr. Croissant's arrival, a quorum was met. Development Impact Fee Rebate Program Mr. Waido noted the Board needs to make a decision on the concept of converting from flat dollar rebate to a percentage of fees paid. Approved by the Board 18 months ago and a recommendation needs to be brought to Council. Mr. Waido stated the Board needs to decide what they feel comfortable with, in terms of percentage rebates for whatever income levels. It was also noted that the Board unanimously agreed on the concept of Mr. Browning's graph. Ms. Rios noted she still objects to the ownership at 80 percent and below; should be 60 percent. Mr. Waido commented that a straight line graph would be easy to produce, all they would need to know is at 60 percent, what percentage rebate do they give. An intermittent scale could be figured, which would probably be the easiest and possibly most equitable way. The Board agreed that not enough people, including the people who worked on that subcommittee, were present, to feel comfortable in making such a major decision. Mr. Waido noted the issues should be packaged together as they are really intertwined issues. This will possibly go to Council at the June 19th meeting, depending on when Mr. Browning returns. Update on HUD CDBG Flood Mitigation Funds Mr. Waido stated that Ms. Glass did an excellent job of speaking on behalf of the Board at last night's CDBG commission meeting. Mr. Waido also noted of the $511,000, a little over $300,000 went to flood mitigation projects. These included enlarging Avery Park detention pond, some housing related items, down payment assistance for people moving or wanting to purchase the Lopez project, and $56,000 to replenish some home funds for Affordable Housing Board Meeting Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 3 down payment assistance, essentially the bulk of it. Ms. Greer questioned what CDBG flood mitigation has to do with down payment assistance. Mr. Waido responded that as a result of the flood, there was a reduced amount of affordable housing to the community, so funds could apply to anything that was related. Mr. Waido also noted that CDBG completed their review and analysis of proposals for FY 1998 CDBG and Home Program, and that of the 1.6 million available, they allocated over 1 million dollars to housing projects. CARE received the greatest amount. There were 32 applicants requesting 4.6 million. New Business Approval of Minutes Moved by Mr. Croissant, seconded by Ms. Glass: To approved the minutes from April 9, 1998. Motion approved unanimously. Larimer Home Improvement Program Representatives from LaHIP were present. Ms. Brown presented the request to the Board for matching funds in the amount of $22,500, used to rehab low to moderate income family homes as low interest loans to 5 percent. Ms. Brown noted all monies for current year have not been spent and so only made nine loans, so far, since being in front of the Board last time. She also distributed handouts and explained the spreadsheet of statistics and a jurisdiction report. Ms. Wagner questioned if the recipient used these funds to improve the home and turn around and make a profit; is there any kind of compensation to the program. Ms. Brown noted they don't really keep track of what they're selling their homes for; probably had four or five payoffs in the last year, a lot for refinancing, rather than selling the home. Another question was how long the average owner is in the home; if they are people who have been there a long time. Ms. Brown stated they are usually there a long time as they have equity in the home, but they can't owe more than the home is worth. Ms. Brown also explained the typical improvements would be windows, floor coverings, new roofs, anything to make the house more efficient. Additions would be made in the case of an overcrowding issue. This work is done by subcontractors, and contracts are signed and invoices turned in before payments are made. An inspection will also be completed to make sure it's been done correctly. Ms. Brown noted that this program would also assist in flood mitigation type issues. Moved by Ms. Rios; seconded by Ms. Wagner: To put forth a recommendation to Council to match the $22,500 that is being requested from the Larimer Home Improvement Program. Motion approved unanimously. Affordable Housing Board Meeting Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 4 Richard's Lake PUD Mr. Price from Wintergreen Homes presented two questions to the Board. He first explained when this was proposed, under LDGS approval, it was a for -sale project at 80 percent of affordable level. Private activity bonds carry different affordable levels, primarily at 60 percent, so there is a difference and it affects financing of the project. First question to the Board was if they feel that a rental project of 27 units at 60 percent is as good as a home ownership of 54 units at 80 percent. If they have to go before the Planning and Zoning Board or City Council, they want to know if the Affordable Housing Board supports this issue. A discussion ensued on this subject. Ms. Wagner brought up the concern dropping down to 60 percent, they're going to be more reliant on public transportation and right now that isn't available there; how will that affect the market. Mr. Price's response was that they can't say for certain. Market studies were done, somewhat speculative, but there is justification to think that 60 percent works. Also agreed transportation could be a factor in limiting the people who want to be there; wouldn't limit the people that qualify. Mr. Waido commented that 27 at 60 percent is no way equal to 54 units at 80 percent. He also noted that the PUD ordinance that was in effect at the time the project went through required the 54 units be affordable, and the definition in that code is 54 units be available to low income people 80 percent of AMI or below. Despite what the Board says, it will fail PUD approval. Ms. Glass, Ms. Rios, Ms. Wagner and Mr. Croissant all agreed that they could not support this; it was not equal. Ms. Greer's comment was, being in the rental arena, she was more in favor of at least getting the 27 rentals. Mr. Price's second question to the Board was the transference to Concord Capital, listed here as the project developer. He explained bond assistance came up with Concord Capital who has done over 30 projects of this type. The consensus of the Board was they had no problem with making the transfer to Concord. Affordable Housing Needs Assessment Ms. Wafts distributed information she put together regarding what's going on in the housing market. Noted some of the information on rentals is from surveys done by a professor at the University of Denver for the Division of Housing, and information on the sales units came from a realtor, and she was able to run her own numbers utilizing that information. Ms. Greer noted it's interesting to see the differences over the years, especially in the three -bedroom units; they are really low. She also commented the figures don't match up to what she has seen. Mr. Waido also agreed the value in these reports is in looking at the Affordable Housing Board Meeting Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 5 changes between the numbers, not so much the actual numbers. It was also noted that the time of year, winter versus summer, is also a major difference. Ms. Watts commented on the second page, if the rents are low -balled, the conclusions she has drawn are alarming. She also explained when looking at the median income chart, it increases each time you add a person. Mr. Frank suggested finding out where the discrepancies are in the three -bedroom, and adjusting it to where everyone agrees it looks reasonable. Ms. Greer suggested using the apartment survey information that CSU compiles annually. She also volunteered to survey some of the property management companies that deal with single family homes and get an average. A discussion on the income figures ensued. Noted that that survey information came from BBC, which is census information, and a good portion of the renters on that chart are students who have very little reported income. Incomes are showing less than 50 percent of AMI but the parents are more than likely paying the bills. Ms. Watts noted that the figures on the chart of Average Sales Price by Unit Size, no real surprise there. She also commented that when comparing average sales price to affordable sales price at different income levels, a person eaming 80 percent of AMI should have no problem affording the average price unit; the larger units, there is a significant difference. The Board agreed the concept is great; gives a good perspective. Also, that Ms. Watts was the first to put these numbers together that they seemed useable. Mr. Waido mentioned there is a study session with Council on June 9th, so in the next Board packet will be information that went to Council for that session. Mainly, where the Board ought to be focusing its attention and discussion of programs, how they match with what's being done now, with what the new needs are. It was also noted there may be a need to form a subcommittee of this group, or use the full committee to meet again before the Council meeting. Ms. Watts and Mr. Frank are acquiring a lot of information and would like to have the Board's input to make sure everyone is on the same track. Will need to meet at least once, maybe twice. Ms. Greer noted she wouldn't mind helping out by looking over the next round of information. Review of Affordable Board Bylaws Since there was not enough time to discuss this issue, it will be tabled to next month's Affordable Housing Board Meeting Minutes May 7, 1998 Page 6 agenda. The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.