Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAffordable Housing Board - Minutes - 11/07/19969 CITY OF FORT COLLINS AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD Meeting Minutes November 7, 1996 Bob Browning, Chair Gina Janett, Council Liaison The Meeting of the Affordable Housing Board began at 4:00 p.m. at 281 North College Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board Members present included: Robert Browning, Stacy Buffum, Mary Cosgrove, Bruce Croissant, Sylvia Glass, Joanne Greer, and Terry Wahl. Staff member present: Ken Waido. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Lou Stitzel spoke on the issue of rebate for home ownership and rental. She stated that the San Cristo project is now working on townhomes and high -density housing, thereby reducing the fees. Having a reduced number of buildings reduced the fees as well. In land trusts, while the rebate does play a part in reducing the mortgage and cost to the homeowner, the rebate is kept in the trust equity. The family cannot therefore realize as a windfall in the future. This plays into the role of the land trust concept, where two equities are developed: The equity trust that is developed through the program; and the funds that the families bring in themselves. These latter funds are returned to the families upon a chance of ownership. All the rebates received are thus protected within the trust; in fact, all the grants are treated in this way in order to preserve home ownership for people in the 30 to 60 percent of median income. The present families in the Parkway families project range from the 30 to 80 percent AM[, with the greater number being between 40 to 50 percent. The land trust thus aids in the effort to keep the housing permanently affordable. Ms. Stitzel noted that in her work with CPAC, she has studied instances of successful projects. These projects range from California to Texas to North Carolina. These projects provide home ownership for people from the 30 to 80 percent bracket. Below 30 percent, government subsidies usually enter the affordability picture. Ms. Stitzel stated that home ownership for such income ranges are dependent upon: Government; nonprofit; and for -profit participation. Nonprofits work closely with banks and suppliers, as well as the for -profits are closely monitored. Citizen participation of the homeowners is also valuable. This participation on many levels serves to mainstream the low-income homeowner. Ms. Stitzel delineated her different views of consumers and citizens; consumers have their own interests at heart; citizens hold the interests of the community at heart. Affordable Housing Board Meeting November 7, 1 W6 Page 2 MINUTES Moved by Mr. Croissant, seconded by Ms. Glass: To approve the minutes as submitted. Motion approved unanimously. HUMAN RIGHTS ORDINANCE Due to copying confusion, the third item of concern to the Board was omitted from the Board's packet. The representative from the Human Rights Commission noted the following concerns regarding the first two issues: An organization should not be except from antidiscrimination dictates simply because it calls itself nonprofit. Marital status discrimination would not apply to single -parent households, because those single parents are often still married. Familial status is a one-way definition of having children and minors living and dependent, so familial status discrimination would not apply in those cases. The issues will be placed on the next Board agenda, when the entire response will be available. Mr. Browning raised the issue of a single parent obtaining housing but having a spouse appear to claim a marital interest. Mr. Browning advocated being allowed to question applicants as to marital status; the Commission's position is to ask applicants if there are parties who would share debts or assets. It was agreed that the City Attorney should be consulted on this issue. Mr. Browning noted that many applicants would not consider a separated spouse to be responsible for shared debts or assets. AFFORDABLE HOUSING VIDEO The video was reviewed by the Board. The Board commented favorably. The video will be played on Channel 27. Discussion was had about presentation to civic groups so that the issue of affordable housing could be addressed proactively. IMPACT FEE - DEVELOPMENT Mr. Waido presented these items in the absence of Mr. Robin. 1) The delay program involved the necessity for a letter of credit. This program was put in place to prevent entities from pulling permits and then leaving. However, the City has the ultimate leverage by refusing to issue COs until the fees are paid. The only negative aspect was the prospect of irascible renters or owners in the event that a Affordable Housing Board Meeting November 7, 1996 Page 3 developer did not pay fees and was not issued a CO. This program was seen as not needed. Discussion was held over the plethora of fees, deposits, guaranties, and letters of credit needed from a developer from a variety of agencies, for various aspects of a project. Board members expressed a strong desire to simplify this process to make development more efficient by a global approach to these requirements. A proposal was made to bring this before Council as a work session item. Moved by Ms. Glass, seconded by Ms. Buffum: That the Board recommend to Council that the impact development fee be amended to remove the requirement of the letter of credit. Motion approved unanimously. 2) Rebate approaches. The history: Council earlier in the past year approved raising some fees and adoption of new fees. The Board had recommended to Council that compensating actions be undertaken within the rebate program. The action proposed was to increase the rebate dollar amount by the same percentage of the average fees increase. Staff was then asked to convert the rebate from a flat dollar amount to a percentage rebate. This resulted in the options before the Board. One advantage of the percentage approach is that as fees are raised, rebates are raised commensurably. Mr. Waido reviewed the different approaches as reflected on the table. Board members noted that no Option 2 was present, and some tables referred to were not attached to their packet. Mr. Waido noted that with no pending rebates, the item could be tabled until full information was before the Board. Discussion was held over the availability of, and drain on, the rebate fund. It was generally agreed that the money was not available to give every entity everything that could be applied for. The Board discussed the impacts on developers under the new fees and old fees schedules. Board members expressed a desire to see what would be paid by developers under both scenarios. Board members also advocated the presentation of actual numbers to Council to present a clear picture on the fees. RETREAT November 15 was discussed as a date for the Board retreat. Scheduling conflicts existed on all dates that were proposed. The retreat will be held on November 15, at 11:00 a.m., at 205 West Oak Street. Lunch will be served. NEW ITEMS Ms. Cosgrove announced that 10 candidates were being interviewed for director of the Affordable Housing Board Meeting November 7,1M Page 4 Funding Partners for Housing Solutions (formerly CDC). Mr. Browning invited the Board to a dedication of the new Habitat house on December 14, from 1:00 to 3:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m.