HomeMy WebLinkAboutAffordable Housing Board - Minutes - 02/05/1998CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD
Meeting Minutes
February 5, 1998
Bob Browning, Chair
Joanne Greer, Vice Chair
Chuck Wanner, City Council Liaison
The meeting of the Affordable Housing Board began at 4:10 p.m. at 281 North College
Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members present included: Chairman Bob
Browning, Sylvie Glass, Joanne Greer, Stacey Overton, Kay Rios. Bruce Croissant and
Sue Wagner arrived later. Staff present: Ken Waido, Ann Watts. Also present: Chuck
Wanner, City Council.
Public discussion.
Ms. Stitzel stated that, in regard to rebates, TRAC immediately subtracts the rebate from
the selling price of the unit. The rebate thereby helps maintain affordability.
Christa, from CARE housing, stated that the rebates go directly to rent reduction. The
rebates help their rent to stay the lowest in Fort Collins. She stated that should the Bull Run
or Buffalo Run developments be grandfathered in for rebates for water service, CARE
would like the Eagle Tree project to be grandfathered into that program as well.
Changes to Rebate Schedule
Ann Watts passed out a chart showing the direct relationship between the percent of
income served and the amount of rebate granted. Mr. Waido noted that the Board was
considering this approach of a percentage so that if Council adds or increases a fee, new
schedule do not have to be created for rebate dollar amounts. The results of the
percentages reflect the approximate dollar amount that is paid now. Ms. Watts noted that
while the percentages work well for home ownership, the Board may wish to examine the
income range within the goals for potential modification.
Mr. Browning questioned whether lower -end housing would be stimulated by the schedule;
he stated that the linear approach would cost the develop about $1600. He questioned why
weighting could not be done for the under-50-percent
developments. Ms. Watts replied that the whole scale could be shifted to provide a higher
rebate. The approach does not have to be linear; it is simpler that way. Weighting lower -
end housing is a valid subject for discussion. Mr. Waido conceded that, although the
program is designed to encourage ownership, weighting should be done to encourage
housing closer to the 30 percent level.
Discussion was held on the feasibility of encouraging housing at lower than 30 percent
levels. It was generally agreed that the rebate would be prorated or extrapolated to meet
those levels. Mr. Browning noted that, surprisingly, a reasonable number of units at the 50
percent level were either available or in progress. Mr. Waido stated that the Council would
not review the chart until March 17; Staff will provide a reworked chart in the interim. Mr.
Browning recommended that the subcommittee complete its work on the rebate fees
recommendations if a comprehensive package will result.
In response to questions by Mr. Wanner, Mr. Browning stated that it may be advisable to
look at weighting the rebates higher in percentage to the lower end of the scale, rather than
using a linear progression. The lower -end housing is in greater need of stimulation; and the
higher -end affordable housing is less marginal and therefore less dependent on the
relatively small amount of subsidy generated through the program.
Proposed Policy - Rebates and Special Purpose Districts
Mr. Waido briefed the Board on this item. The Board in the past recommended that a
project inside City limits but receiving utility services from a special district should receive
a reduced rebate since not all fees are going to the City. The item was delayed on
Council's agenda to receive discussion from the general manager of the district in question.
Mr. McFadden, the developer, also had concerns to express.
Mr. Waido stressed the need for a consistent policy. City policy is clear that developments
within a utility district will be served by that district. Staff needs a policy decision of whether
fees paid to a district are to be included within the total amount of fees from which the
rebate is calculated, or whether fees to the City only are included within the rebated
amount.
Scott McFadden asked that tap fees rebates continue. The rebate program is a main
reason that the company secured two projects in Fort Collins. The Fort Collins program is
being copied by other jurisdictions as well. The program is highly valuable.
Mr. McFadden stated that the Bull Run project was approved by the City on the bond side
in January 1997 and approved by Planning in September 1997. The project was not aware
at any time during any approval process that the rebate would not be provided. He, Lucia
Liley, and John Fishbach met last summer to confirm that the rebate program was in place,
funded, and available.
Mr. Waido clarified that there was never an intent that Bull Run or Buffalo Run would not
be eligible for rebates; rather, the question was whether the developments would get a full
rebate based on the schedule in effect at the time and because no City fees were being
a
Affordable Housing Board
February 5, 1998 Meeting Minutes
Page 3
paid for tap and sewer services. The City will be collecting no fees because it is not
providing the service. Fee rebate amounts in terms of placement within the city will be
affected by the discussion taking place.
Mr. McFadden stated that there is no written policy as to the utility district that will be used
by a project. It is this developer's preference to use City water and sewer, but that choice
was not available. The project finds itself doubly penalized when it is told to use a more
expensive district and also told that the City will not provide rebates.
Dean Smith, of the Boxelder Water and Sanitation District, stated that the District has
about 8,300 users and bonded indebtedness committed to the infrastructure that will serve
the subject property. The line in question serves Cherry Hills; Cherry Hills and the City have
a handshake agreement on the number of users who can use the line. The District, in good
faith, entered into agreements to construct crossings under Mulberry intended to serve
these properties and adjacent properties as well.
Mr. Smith went on to state that the developer has his options; he asked the Board to
consider that it is impinging upon some long agreements that have considerable financial
impact, if the Board elects to make a caveat that a gift has conditions or a subsidy has
conditions. The District does not think that that is correct, nor does it look upon it kindly
when old agreements are being impinged upon. The District has recently expended a large
amount of funding in support of this project.
In response to questions by the Board, Mr. McFadden stated that the number of affordable
units will not be affected since that is a function of bond and tax credit financing. He asked
the Board to consider that the project skewed its rents lower on City Staff's representation
that the rebate program was in place.
Discussion was held on the interest the District had in whether the project received
rebates. Mr. McFadden stated that Buffalo Run, at Link and Lemay, has City water and
sewer lines through that property, and City services will be used for that. Mr. McFadden,
Mr. Smith, and Mr. Waido discussed the effects of the meeting that Mr. Smith and Mr.
Waido attended. The City will not serve properties in the District unless the District declines
service.
Board members noted that District/City lines and agreements were beyond the scope of
the Board; rather, the only issue to be decided was to recommend whether fees should be
rebated that will not be received by the City. Concerns were expressed whether
assurances were given by Staff to the developer. It was noted that the rebate program
could be depleted more quickly if funds were paid out without a corresponding receipt from
Affordable Housing Board
February 5, 1998 Meeting Minutes
Page 4
fees. Board members expressed a desire to encourage affordable housing through the
program; others expressed a reluctance to expend funds for what was originally considered
to be a rebate of City revenues. It was affirmed by several members that City policy is to
rebate City fees; the present situation was asking for a special exception.
Moved by Mr. Croissant, seconded by Ms. Rios: To affirm the Board's original
decision regarding applicability of rebate fees. Mr. McFadden protested that nothing
in the City's literature had indicated that rebates would not be applicable. Mr. Smith
asserted that applying a condition to the developer was abrogation of a contract. Mr.
Browning noted that the City policy did not guarantee rebated fees to anyone. Mr.
McFadden replied that he had received assurances that rebate funds would be available.
Motion approved unanimously. Mr. Waido noted that the item would be on Council's
March 17 agenda.
Discussion with City Manager
The City Manager is supporting of escrowing funds and increasing staff time in support of
the program. The onus is now on Staff and the Subcommittee to devise a method to use
this program as efficiently as possibly.
TRAC
The units have not closed, and various entities, including the City, bank, and Housing
Authority, are exploring options. Lou Stitzel offered that FNMA had requested an appraisal
of the land separate from the units. That appraisal has been done. TRAC is awaiting
approval by FNMA so that the units may then close. Some rents are being received from
units. In response to questioning, Ms. Stitzel stated that changes had been imposed during
this project that were out of the ordinary, causing TRAC to start from scratch at a very late
date, resulting in the present problem. TRAC did not receive permission from the City to
collect rents until the end of August. Some people were paying back rents, and payments
were in limbo, creating a big funding gap.
Human Rights Ordinance
No comments were heard on this issue.
Public Awareness Subcommittee
Affordable Housing Board
February 5, 1998 Meeting Minutes
Page 5
Kay Rios report. The Subcommittee is considering development of a Web page under the
City Web page umbrella. This Web page would contain names, addresses, and contacts
of people and entities in relation to affordable housing. A banner may be displayed with the
Web page information. A Power Point presentation is being prepared for demonstrations
at various events. A luncheon will be held, and interested parties, including Board
members, builders, and private and public entities, are being invited.
A map is being prepared of affordable housing projects in the city. This is to help counter
the NIMBY presence, by demonstrating that these projects are more prevalent and less
offensive than imagined.
Approval of Minutes
Moved by Ms. Greer, seconded by Ms. Glass: To approve the minutes. Motion
approved unanimously.
Uniform Building Code
Felix Lee spoke at length on this subject. Matters of note: A required special underlayment
under the roof, or ice dam, will no longer be required. Six nails per shingle will be required,
as befits a high -wind area. Window wells for escape windows will increase in size. The new
code will relax some accessibility requirements on ground -floor units. The new Code will
be in agreement with the Fair Housing Act, State codes, and ANSI guidelines.
The Board discussed whether to endorse the proposed changes; Board members did not
feel qualified to do so.
Affordable Housing Monthly Production Report
Ms. Watts distributed the report. She asked for comments concerning the format or
suggestions regarding additional format. Anticipated completion dates were requested.
Small developers will be shown as well as the larger ones. Ms. Watts noted that she tried
to distinguish the projects with all affordable units from the projects with a percentage of
affordable units as that information became available. Board members complimented Ms.
Watts on the presentation and thoroughness of the report.
Ms. Watts showed the Board the graphic presentation in the back of the report. Board
members requested that projects completed in 1997 be represented as well as those in
progress. It was noted that the graph is another demonstration of the availability of 50
percent units and need for units at the lower end of AMI.
Affordable Housing Board
February 5, 1998 Meeting Minutes
Page 6
HUD - Best Practices
HUD had offered to tout the rebate program in their Best Practices publication. When it
was revealed that the program was carried out through City funds rather than HUD funds,
the offer was withdrawn.
HOME
Mr. Waido distributed a memo authorized by Julie Smith applying for a waiver to purchase
price limits. These limits are set by HUD on a county -wide basis; the Fort Collins market
is significantly higher than that set by HUD.
Action Plan - Housing Study
Ms. Watts distributed an action plan for the inception of a study to determine housing
supply and demand, where gaps exist, and where efforts and strategies regarding
affordable housing need to be focused. She will first focus on sources of existing data and
survey the available information. The study includes questions that need to be answered
through analysis of appropriate data. First draft of priorities is targeted for April; discussion
of priorities is set for May; finalizing for presentation to Council is targeted for June. Mr.
Wanner reiterated Council's commitment to the issue and urged, the Board to take the
necessary steps to advance this process.
The meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m