►
From YouTube: Asheville Regional Housing Consortium – March 22, 2023
Description
Regular meeting of the Asheville Regional Housing Consortium.
Access the agenda and other meeting materials at the City of Asheville website: https://www.ashevillenc.gov/department/city-clerk/boards-and-commissions/asheville-regional-housing-consortium/
Participate before and during the meeting on our public engagement hub: https://publicinput.com/PY8666
A
B
A
Link,
we
also
have
an
option
for
the
public
to
work
from
live
bios
to
do
so.
You
call
855-925-2801
and
enter
meetings
code
8763,
that's
855-925-2801,
meeting
code
8763
for
those
of
you
out
there
listening
and
joining
us
today
welcome
I'm
going
to
go
through
and
introduce
all
board
members
and
staff
leadership
so
that
company
you
could
quickly
come
on
mute
and
play
quickly.
A
G
A
F
A
Great
wonderful,
we
have
I'm
introduced
some
staff
leaders
as
well
community
and
economic
development
director
Mickey
Reed
good
morning.
Everyone
Community
Development
coordinator
Zane,
alley
good
morning,
great
okay
and
jumper
to
the
agenda
and
because
we
are
poor
and
we're
going
to
find
the
packages
of
approved.
A
Okay,
so
I'm
gonna
I'll
be
calling
out
agenda
numbers
to
use
completed
the
I
agenda
item
one
we're
moving
on
to
Seattle,
so
there
will
be
excellent.
So
we
have
three
here:
that's
20
23
we're
gonna
have
to
do
it
for
each
of
them.
I
believe.
Thank
you,
then.
We'll
have
March
6th
and
March
19th
as
well.
So
they're
going
with
changes
together,
may
I
get
a
motion.
D
A
D
I
A
A
D
K
A
A
N
A
D
A
D
A
I
A
A
D
A
D
A
H
A
H
D
K
O
Thank
you
so
much
and
so
Dana.
If
you
want
to
go
ahead
and
pull
and
slide,
pull
those
slides
up
and
share
your
screen,
we'll
get
started
and
so
for
our
meeting
today.
This
is
our
funding
meeting.
So
we're
excited
to
be
at
this
point
and
I
just
have
a
brief
overview
and
then
really
our
plan
is
to
turn
it
over
to
the
chair
to
really
facilitate
the
conversation
around
the
funding
recommendations.
O
I
will
go
ahead
and
share
that
we
are
joined
today
by
two
Consultants
that
assisted
City
staff,
with
the
evaluation
of
the
of
the
recommend
of
the
excuse
me,
evaluation
of
the
applications,
as
well
as
the
eligibility
requirements
of
the
home
program,
Stephen,
Latham
and
Peter
Hughes-
are
with
TDA
Consulting
and
TDA.
Consulting
has
worked
with
the
city
for
for
a
number
of
months
and
they
really
know
the
home
program.
O
Well,
so
we're
happy
to
have
them
join
us
today,
and
so
why
don't
I
kind
of
walk
us
through
the
slides
and
then
we'll
get
started
with
the
funding
discussions?
Athena
if
you
want
to
advance
the
slides
to
the
next
one?
Okay,
so
just
a
bit
of
background
around
the
application
process
it
opened
in
December,
and
then
applications
were
due
in
February
3rd
from
that
time
frame,
February
to
March
staff
worked
with
TDA
to
evaluate
the
applications
and
determine
eligibility.
O
So
we
wanted
to
just
share
out
all
of
the
applications
that
were
received,
so
you
can
see
quite
a
number
there's
definite
need
in
our
community
for
for
these
for
affordable
housing
and
these
programs
that
are
offered
by
our
providers.
Here
we
wanted
to
share.
We
just
got
just
under
eight
million
dollars
in
asks
from
our
regional
Partners
next
slide,
and
of
that
we
did
want
to
reflect
the
revised
total.
O
All
right
next
slide.
Okay,
just
a
little
walk
through
of
the
funding
availability.
I
want
to
make
sure
I
get
this
right,
and
there
are
some
nuances
here.
So
I
wanted
to
make
clear.
It
is
also
defined
in
the
staff
report,
but
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
all
walk
through
and
we
understand
where
these
numbers
come
from.
So
first
we
have
the
annual
allocation
that
comes
from
HUD,
that's
about
1.3
and
then
the
next
line
item
is
program
income.
O
Normally,
it
is
not
that
high,
but
this
past
January
we
did
have
a
prior
loan
that
was
paid
off
prior
to
its
maturity
date.
So
we
are
showing
that
as
a
receipt
into
the
program
as
program
income,
and
so
that
estimate
is
428.,
then
we
do
have
some
return
funds.
I'm
sure
you
all
remember.
The
conversation
last
fall
where
we
had
some
returned
funds
from
tax
credit
projects
that
did
not
advance,
and
so
we
had
at
the
time
had
really
talked
about
what
to
do
with
those
return
funds.
O
It
was
ultimately
decided
a
couple
things
when
it
was
decided
that
we
would
just
carry
forward
those
return
funds
to
this
funding
cycle.
But,
as
you
can
see,
we've
also
reflected
the
other
intent
of
this
body.
As
discussed
last
October,
the
intent
would
be
to
fund
help
mates,
FY
2223,
full
commitment,
so
you're
just
seeing
the
Delta
there
I
think
they
had
asked
for
roughly
170
at
the
time.
The
commitment
was
about
150
and
some
chains
so
you're,
seeing
that
Delta
there
reflected
as
a
negative
number.
Okay,
the
second
piece.
O
So
the
next
line
item
is
the
Madison
reallocation,
that
is
the
chcmc
Community
Housing
Coalition
you'll,
see
you
see
that
reflected
as
a
negative
number
there,
because,
as
we
had
all
agreed
to
fund
Madison
and
the
last
allocation,
it
was
determined
that
they
were
not
able
to
perform
their
project
as
design
using
Toto
phones.
So
instead
we
want
to
again
value
that
commitment
right
that
was
made
previously,
but
then
take
that
out
of
our
existing
availability
of
funding
and
therefore
show
that
as
a
a
negative
number
here
in
our
in
our
receipts.
O
What
that
yields
is
a
total
amount
of
2.4
and
some
change.
But
then
again
now,
let's
look
at
the
available
to
award
line
items
you're
now,
seeing
that
as
a
positive
number
from
the
choto
fund.
So
really
now
that
we
have
allocated
from
our
non-shoto
to
Madison
County
we're
seeing
that
that
is
now
reflected
as
a
choto
receipt
and
this
year's
availability
to
award
we're
also
seeing
that
15.
That's
really
15
percent
of
the
annual
allocation
that's
available
for
chotto
in
this
year's
cycle.
O
That's
197
and
some
change
we're
also
pulling
out
the
10
percent
Administration
budget
for
our
staffing
costs.
That's
of
the
allocation
and
of
program
income
so
174
there
and
then
we're
seeing
our
non-toto
award.
So
that's
a
total
of
the
carry
forward,
plus
this
year's
allocation
for
about
2
million.
So
hopefully
that
makes
sense
again.
That's
all
enumerated
in
the
staff
report.
I
just
wanted
to
be
clear
on
the
numbers
all
right
next
slide:
okay,.
B
B
Yes,
there's
a
403
000
that
had
been
returned
from
from
projects
that
had
been
funded
as
showdos
that
returned
them.
I,
don't
recall
right
off
the
top
of
my
head,
which
projects
they
were,
but
they've
kind
of
been
through
they've,
been
through
the
process
once
or
twice
of
being
real
being
allocated
and
returned
and
then
reallocated
again.
O
A
D
A
O
O
O
J
A
O
That
I
think
it.
Let
me
revise
that
I'm.
So
sorry,
my
apologies
all
right.
Well,
let
me
let
me
kind
of
complete
this
section
and
then
I
will
I
will
make
that
change
in
the
funding
allocation,
but
I
apologize.
That's
a
that's
a
typo
on
my
part,
so
let
me
just
make
sure
that
I
can
I
can
get
that
settled
for
for
our
final
decision
making.
O
O
That's
really
why
we
want
TDA
to
support
this
process
and
to
support
the
Consortium
in
the
decision
making,
as
they
are
really
experts
in
this
field.
When
we
were
looking
at
funding
allocations,
we
wanted
to
be
guided
by
certain
principles
that
come
through
as
we
look
at
our
bylaws
for
this
Consortium,
as
well
as
general
principles
of
Home
funding,
because
we're
a
regional
board,
we
really
want
to
ensure
that
Regional
collaboration
and
Regional
parity
also,
it
seems
to
be
a
good
practice
this
to
provide
full
funding
to
the
greatest
extent
possible.
O
O
Lastly,
of
course,
this
body
is
also
governed
by
a
Consolidated
plan
that
Consolidated
plan
really
covers
the
period
of
2020
to
2024,
and
those
priority
needs
are
clearly
listed
in
that
Consolidated
plan
and
I
think
the
next
slide
actually
shows
those
there.
We
go
so
really
just
looking
at
how
we
advance
rental
housing
for
for
households
special
needs
housing.
You
can
see
that
list
there,
but
this
is
really
how
we
look
at
applications
on
a
year-by-year
basis.
O
O
O
That's
the
one
we
will
work
on
this.
Yes
as
we
go
so
I
wanted
to
walk
through
and
then
otherwise,
chair,
Turner,
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you
to
really
talk
about
funding
Awards,
and
we
will
make
sure
that
our
data
is
correct.
Hopefully,
everyone
can
see
this
okay,
all
right,
so
I
wanted
to
walk
us
through
kind
of
the
first
part
of
the
recommendation,
but
as
you'll
see,
there
is
still
funding
that
needs
to
be
allocated
to
really
round
out
the
funding
recommendation.
O
So
what
this
reflects
is
really
some
decisions
that
were
easier
than
others
in
in
correspondence
with
those
funding
principles
that
we've
looked
at
earlier.
I
want
to
start
by
talking
about
Fair,
Haven
Meadows,
and
so
that
is
line
number
three
here.
Their
request
was
at
350.
again,
their
request
really
does
correspond
with
those
funding
principles
that
we
discussed
earlier,
they're
very
close
to
being
ready
to
go.
O
This
is
the
last
funding
in
this
body
has
previously
funded
Transylvania,
County
and
and
this
project
in
particular
and
I,
think
we
heard
a
strong
presentation
from
that
group
so
really
having
this
funding
as
a
last
in
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
So
that
was
really
an
easy
recommendation
to
make
for
the
consortium's
consideration.
O
Then
really
looking
at
the
parity
with
other
counties,
we
see
Madison
fully
funded
for
the
community
housing
coalition's
requested
Awards
of
this
year,
you'll
scroll
down
and
see
that
we
are
also
recommending
the
tenant-based
rental
assistance
for
helpmate
for
the
Asheville
Buncombe
area.
You'll
see
that
for
Henderson
County
Habitat
for
Humanity
and
their
down
payment
assistance
program.
We're
also
recommending
full
funding
there
and
Homeward
Bound
for
their
tbra
for
the
Asheville
Buncombe
area.
O
I
think
we
heard
that
in
our
last
discussion
and
so
really
I
think
the
the
focus
of
our
discussions
is
really
where,
where
the
remaining
funding
lines
up
with
respect
to
the
multi-family,
and
so
with
that
I'm
going
to
scramble
and
make
sure
that
my
numbers
are
right,
so
I
know
the
total
that
we
have
but
chair,
Turner
I
will
turn
it
back
over
to
you
to
really
walk
us
through
any
Reflections
that
we
have
of
the
recommendations
as
presented
now,
but
then
also
thoughts
around
the
multi-family
opportunity
that
presents
itself.
Okay.
A
K
I
I
have
one
clarifying
question
before
we
get
past
that
first
section
and
the
the
110
request
for
the
Community
Housing
Coalition,
when
that
applicant
had
mentioned
that
it
was
originally
awarded
as
a
Toto
project.
Does
that
relate
at
all
to
the
205
that
was
reallocated
in
Madison?
If
we
could
just
clarify
that.
O
A
Okay,
I
was
particularly
fond
of
that
application,
both
of
them-
and
you
know,
I-
think
we
often
we
always
try
and
keep
in
check,
and
we
know
that
buncomes,
the
largest
county,
but
are
we
do?
Are
we
providing
options
to
All
Counties?
So
we
had
a
good
representation
from
Hendersonville
from
Madison
I
mean
we
had
it's
good.
A
We
can
just
take
broad
Strokes
at
this,
and
people
can
say
you
know
I
really
want
to
support
this,
or
we
can
talk
philosophy.
It
looks
like
we
can
fully
fund
most
things,
and
then
we
have
this
balance
for
this
multi-family.
Is
everybody
good
with?
What's
existing?
Well,
everybody
being
fully
funded
in
that
top
tier?
G
I
just
wanted
to
ask,
because
it
comes
up
and
I
know:
we've
had
kind
of
some
standing
open
Awards
for
our
tenant-based
rental
assistance
providers.
These
are
Asheville
Buncombe
projects,
I
just
want
to
clarify
kind
of
where
they
are
with
prior
Consortium
Awards.
If
those
have
been
contracted
and
expended
I
just
said
they
have
kind
of
a
large
outstanding
existing
commitment.
G
A
O
E
E
So
if
everyone
can
see
this,
let
me
get
larger,
so
I
went
through
the
fiscal
years
that
we
have
and
it
really
kicks
off
at
16,
17
fiscal
year
or
fiscal
year,
17,
and
so,
as
you
can
see
from
here,
we
have
from
fiscal
year
2017
to
2019.
All
of
those
funds
that
were
awarded
for
tvra
were
fully
expended
where
it
starts
to
get
a
little
tricky
here
is
getting
into
the
housing
authority
of
the
city
of
Asheville
tvra
for
fiscal
year
1819.
E
they
were
awarded
75
000.
and
at
this
date
they
have
available
funding
at
the
moment
of
56
000.
That
needs
to
be
kind
of
dealt
with.
Moving
along.
We
have
the
Haka
home
tvra
resident
mobile
Mobility
from
fiscal
year
2020
they
were
awarded
50
000,
they
expended
the
1
859
and
if
you
know,
if
you
guys
know
how
we
kind
of
do
here,
if
they
have
some
open
or
outstanding
Awards
on
the
books,
we
will
hold
off.
E
We
will
kind
of
hold
everything
until
they've
expended
that
funding
down.
So
that's
when,
if
you're
looking
down
below
that's
when
things
start
to
kind
of
build
to
match
the
point
here:
okay,
so
for
fiscal
year,
21
Haka
was
awarded
95
000.
They
have
not
expended
any
of
that
funding.
At
this
moment,
homework
Bound
tvra
for
Buncombe
County
for
a
fiscal
year
2021
they
were
awarded
a
hundred
thousand.
E
They
have
not
expended
any
funding
at
this
point
for
Homeward
Bound
tbra
Asheville
from
fiscal
year
2021
they
were
awarded
eighty
thousand
dollars
and
they
expended
74
228.
yeah
moving
on
we're
kind
of
getting
into
kind
of
current
time.
Here
we
have
help
mates
help
me
inks
tbra,
132,
from
fiscal
year
2022
they
are
awarded
110
000.
They
haven't
expended
any
of
that
funding
and
that
right
there
is
due
to
getting
a
slow
start
to
that
project
and
then
having
other
funds
that
needed
to
be
dealt
with.
E
What
we,
what
we
do
here
is
we
don't
want
to
have
a
lot
of
Home
funds
or
any
funds
really
open
on
the
books,
because
it
starts
to
muddy
the
water
a
little
bit.
And
then,
if
you
move
down
the
list
here,
we
have
Homeward
Bound
of
Western
North
Carolina
tbra
for
Asheville.
They
were
awarded
80
000,
they
haven't
expended
anything.
We
have
homework
down
of
Western
North
Carolina
tbr8,
Buncombe
County
for
fiscal
year
2022
they
were
awarded
a
hundred
thousand.
They
have
not
spent
any
of
that
funding
down.
E
As
of
yet
we
have
the
housing
authority
of
the
city
of
Asheville,
tbra,
welcome
or
Mobility
excuse
me,
and
they.
This
is
fiscal
2022
funds.
They
have
a
rewarded,
75
000.
They
have
not
spent
any
of
that
as
well,
and
then
we
have
helpmate
tvi
for
domestic
violence
survivors.
They
were
awarded
150
000,
and
this
is
the
one
that
we
are
going
to
discuss
to
add
the
full
total
to
bring
it
up
to
170
000
and
they
have
not
expended
any
of
those
funds
due
to
older
funds
on
the
books.
D
A
E
N
A
E
Let
me
let
me
just
go
back
because
I
do
want
to
clarify
that
and
thank
you.
I
didn't
realize
that
it
wasn't
clear.
Obviously,
so
the
awarded
amount
that
they
were
awarded
is
in
this
column,
page
right,
and
so
what
is
left
so
what
is
available?
The
amount
that
they
have
to
spend
from
is
in
this
available
amount
column,
so
they
need
to
expend
the
56
000
they
well.
Actually,
no.
A
E
A
E
So
usually,
what
happens
when
we
start
to
get
balances
like
this
and
what
I've
observed?
It's
that
agencies
start
out
with
already
funding
open
right.
So
they've
already
gone
through
the
process,
and
there
is,
you
know,
an
outstanding
balance
to
their
organization
right
and
when
that
happens,
it
kind
of
from
my
opinion
holds
everything
up,
and
we
want
to
kind
of
pause
there
to
make
sure
that
we
expend
those
fundings
previously
built
so
that
whenever
we
go
down
to
say
fiscal
year
2021,
we
can
kind
of
attack
that,
with
a
clear
slate.
A
L
G
E
They
have
not
so
I.
This
is
where
I
kind
of
come
into
play
with
home
in
general.
Is
whenever
I
assume
the
project
manager
role
for
this
particular
organization.
They
had
already
had
fiscal
year,
21
22
funding,
sitting
on
the
books
that
needed
to
be
addressed
before
we
could
move
to
fiscal
year
2223.
So
that's
where
we're
at
with
help
eight
so
I.
B
Think
what
would
maybe
help
clarify
what
the
situation
is?
The
column,
let's
see
rows
32
through
36
right
now,
they're
showing
that
they
were
awarded
and
because
they've
not
gone
to
contract.
That
means
that
they
would
also
need
to
have
a
value
in
column
I
to
show
that
that
amount
that
amount
is
still
available,
so
that
will
show.
B
E
F
A
Were
awarded
55
000.,
how
have
they
spent
the
money
they
have
expended?
Yes,
yes,
jump
down
to
Housing
Authority
of
city
of
Asheville
fiscal
year,
1819.
75
000
award,
fifty
six
thousand
two.
Seventy
three
is
what
they
have
left
to
spend
or
is
what
they
have
spent.
Okay,
I
think
you
originally
said
20.
Something
thousand
so
I
think
this
so.
A
A
To
your
point,
though,
and
to
the
staff's
point,
if
the
previous
years
on
previous
years
on
previous
years
and
some
of
these
years,
they
can't
even
start
because
they're
still
working
on
the
previous
years,
but
do
we
need
to
withhold
funding
from
this
cycle
and
let
everybody
catch
up
if
possible,
it's
a
thirty
thousand
dollar
ask
of
Homeward
Bound
and
help
made
is
157
300.
Kate
go
ahead.
K
So
I
I
would
be
okay
with
that
for
Homeward
ban
I
just
want
to
clarify
on
the
the
two
project
scorecards
for
those
homework
ban
was
the
only
one
that
I
guess
staff
had
a
concern
or
possible
ineligibility
for
unspent
Grant
funds,
and
it
that
wasn't
noted
on
helpmate
scorecard
and
so
I.
Just
was
there
a
distinction
there.
A
Address
that,
but
so
there's
another
I
serve
as
the
cities
of
Asheville's
Housing
Community
Development,
chair
too.
So
we
just
had
another
meeting
yesterday
over
different
funds,
a
different
group
and
I've
heard
from
helpmate
yesterday,
and
they
said
we
just
got
the
first
contract
like
60
days
ago,
and
that
is
what
she's
reminding
me
of
right
now.
M
The
same
question
via
email
about
the
scorecard
with
homework
found
in
particular,
seeing
that
it
was
like
maybe
eligible
and
got
an
email
back
from
Anna
and
correct
me
if
I'm
misspeaking,
but
I,
think
the
email
said
that
it
had
been
updated
to
be
eligible
after
they
followed
up
with
other
answers
to
some
questions
from
staff.
I
can't
speak
to
the
help
me
scorecard,
though,.
A
G
So
I
guess
what
I'm
curious
about
so
and
looking
at
the
spreadsheet
and
I
know
that
everybody's
kind
of
working
on
the
stuff
on
the
Fly
which
I
appreciate
this
is
always
the
fun
part
of
the
Consortium
and
the
virtual
meeting
as
well.
But
what
I'm
you
know
there
are
I
guess:
Homeward
Bound
applies
for
funding
and
separates
and
that's
why
they
have
in
a
single
year
like
two
different
Awards
right.
They
have
their
Asheville
focused,
tbra
and
then
Buncombe
County,
outside
of
Asheville
and
I.
G
Think
they've
had
I
mean
kind
of
obviously
from
even
the
fact
that
they've
spent
funding
already
in
Asheville,
but
not
yet
in
Vancouver,
County
they've
had
a
little
bit
more
success
or
movement
in
being
able
to
do
tbra
within
the
city
limits
it's
kind
of
what
that's
doing,
but
regardless
of
that
fact,
you
know
currently,
with
their
existing
awarded
amount
and
whether
they're
in
encumbered
by
contract
or
not,
they
have
almost
350
000
in
available
funding
to
spend.
Are
they
going
to
spend
that
before
their
next
award
contract
is
available
to
them?
G
I
guess
that's
my
question
and
you
know
helpmate
I
understand
they.
Just
went
to
contract,
so
that's
they're,
just
now
eligible
to
spend
that
first
110
000.
they
have
260
000
awarded.
Are
they
going
to
as
an
organization
be
able
to
expend
those
funds
before
they'll
be
contracted
and
able
to
spend
this
next
allocation?
I?
Think
it's
more
about
making
sure
that
we're
not
allocating
funding
that
then
sits
for
multiple
years.
G
Unexpended
and
tbra
I
mean
it
cares,
act,
funding
and
other
avenues
provided
a
lot
of
tenant-based
rental
assistance
which
delayed
expenditure
of
funds
and
a
lot
of
these
programs
and
I
totally
acknowledge
that
there
are
other
delays
like
getting
to
contract
and
certain
things
that
happen.
That's
just
the
way
that
these
kind
of
funds
work
but
and
I'm,
not
even
going
to
mention
the
Housing
Authority
because
they
didn't
apply
for
it
right
like
they
have
some
outstanding
balance,
but
they
didn't
seek
it
in
this
round
or
on
the
list
of
eligible
ones.
G
G
G
If,
if
a
multi-family
project
didn't
move
forward,
you
know
our
interest
as
the
county
is
obviously
advancing,
multi-family,
but
I
think
housing
availability
will
help
with
tenant-based
needs
as
well,
but
and
also
just
to
you
know,
address
the
open,
multi-family
balance
as
if
there's
any
way,
we
can
make
more
funds
available
just
trying
to
impact
more
projects.
That's
kind
of
what
I'm
interested
in
but
I,
don't
want
to
say.
Let's
cut
that
without
having
an
understanding.
B
A
I
appreciate
that
and
I
appreciate
staff
working
on
this
side,
I'm
still
a
little
confused
by
this
chart
and
the
difference
of
the
1.56
million
Nikki.
You
have
your
hand
up
we're.
Also
Robin,
the
vice
chair
and
I
are
having
a
conversation
over
here
on
messages
with
help
me
maybe
we'll
hear
from
when
we're
back
and
you're
welcome
to
reach
out
just
get
some
clarity.
O
Well,
I
was
just
going
to
share
with
the
committee
I
think
you
know,
because
we,
because
we've
gone
through
this
home
art
process
and
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
the
information
from
our
stakeholders
and
our
agencies
have
started
to
come
through
about
tbra
I.
Think
we
heard
through
that
process
that
tbra
was
really
hard
to
make
happen
because
of
the
lack
of
availability
of
units
and
and
I
also
want
to
say,
I
think
the
the
benefit
of
how
the
allocation
is
proposed
for
the
home
ARP
funds
right
now
allows
1
million
for
Supportive
Services.
O
So
again,
this
is
something
that
staff
we
really
just
pieced
this
together
yesterday
with
really
looking
through
these
numbers
and
trying
to
identify
what
that
Log
Jam
might
be
with
the
expense
of
really
trying
to
understand
how
we
could
help
support
the
advancement
of
getting
these
dollars
into
communities
that
that
need
it.
But
I
think
that
is
an
important
component.
That's
very
nuanced!
Within
HUD
regs,
right
of
having
that
case
management
be
cdbg.
That
is
City
Limits
dependent,
but
then
now
how
we
have
this
opportunity
with
Supportive
Services
from
hum
ARP.
O
So
again,
I
want
to
say
that
you
know
there
are
some
things
that
that
provide
more
context
to
how
these
funding
decisions
can
really
change
in
the
next
coming
months,
as
this
body
also
looks
at
how
to
allocate
those
Hallmark
funds.
So
I'm
just
saying
that
for
context,
I
don't
know
if
that
has
any
bearing
on
these
funding
decisions
today,
but
I
wanted
to
call
attention
to
that
and
make
sure
that
we
come
back
to
that
at
a
later
Consortium
meeting,
hey.
N
That
is
not
very
much
expended
but
is
in
fact,
essentially
tapped
out
if,
if
all
of
those
funds
have
been
committed
but
are
going
to
get
spent
down
over
24
months,
sort
of
you
know
in
kind
of
roughly
even
increments,
so
in
in
terms
of
kind
of
assessing,
like
What's
the
progress
I.
Don't
know
that
the
unexpended
balance
is
the
best
measure.
C
A
Encumberton
is
a
big
deal,
I
heard
it
mentioned
from
so
that
means
that
you've
been
awarded,
and
just
like
you
just
said,
you
have
two
years
to
spend
the
money,
but
it's
it's
committed,
but
balance
is
drawing
down
slowly
so
that
just
thinking
we're
looking
at
that
balance
isn't
the
answer.
We
need
a
column,
we're
encumbered,
I
call
them
we're
uncomfortable
and
none
would
really
truly
know
for
right
now.
I
want
to
move
this
along.
A
It
sounds
like
we
are
saying:
let's
not
commit
the
thirty
thousand
dollars
to
number
rebound
this
year,
we're
putting
them
spending
down
previous
incomes.
Thank
you
for,
and
you
still
have
some
and
not
ask
for
more
and
please
go
to
able
to
use
they're,
saying
they're
also
a
little
confused,
but
yes,
they
do
plan
to
be
able
to
spend
that
money,
plus
this
157,
so
I'm
thinking
we
commit
to
that.
It
feels
a
little
small
to
what
holders
that.
A
O
O
So,
okay
and
I
can
I
can
certainly
be
on
hand
to
help
us
work
through
these
numbers.
If
there
is
a
desire
to
see
how
our
our
available
balance
would
change,
if
there's
a
reduction
in
any
of
the
funding
for
for
what
we've
just
discussed
but
again
right
now,
we
have
we
have
a
balance
of
about
750
to
allocate,
as
well
as
the
400
in
choto
and
I
will
say.
You
know
we
talked
with
our
Consultants
on
whether
or
not
it
would
be
advisable.
O
You
know
to
really
see
if
we
could
delay
the
total
expenditure
and
then
look
at
having
the
additional
total
amount
be
available
for
a
bigger
pot,
but
at
the
same
time,
Mountain
housing
opportunities
is
one
of
the
projects
presented
here
today
that
is
Toto
eligible
and
so
I
wanted.
To
mention,
too,
they
have
provided
additional
documentation
to
staff
regarding
their
Dogwood
Health
Trust
award,
as
well
as
their
Buncombe
County
arpa
award.
O
So
again,
when
we're
looking
through
those
funding
principles,
it
could
be
that
mountain
housing
could
be
a
an
eligible
and
a
prioritized
project
to
really
fund
because
of
their
total
distinction,
as
well
as
the
fact
that
their
project
is
so
far
along
in
the
process
that
meets
those
funding.
Principles,
as
described
so
just
wanted
to
provide
that
additional
clarification.
K
A
D
Sure
so
I
did
talk
to
Mountain
housing
yesterday
and
one
as
Nikki
mentioned.
One
of
the
things
that
sets
this
project
apart
is
that,
with
a
little
more
funding,
they
can
actually
begin
breaking
ground
this
year,
as
opposed
to
waiting
until
next
year,
so
that
could
get
some
more
units
on
the
ground
faster.
O
A
A
A
One
of
the
thoughts
I
had
I'll
just
Arizona
I'm
a
little
worried.
There's
seven
of
you
off
my
screen
without
your
hand
up
so
flirt
out.
If
you're
trying
to
pick
it
up
and
I
can't
tell
what
I
thought
I
had.
Is
that
what
we
technically
typically
do
in
this
company
is
say:
okay,
we've
always
talked
about
applicants
and
let's
boost
their
application
and
give
them
a
little
bit
in
the
hopes
that
it
helps
and
then,
when
they
are
whoever's
awarded,
will
come
back
together
and
reality
all
the
functions.
I'm
curious.
If
434.
A
You
get
that
perception
from
their
paperwork
or
from
their
presentation
kind
of
doctor
perception.
They
were
already
fully
funded,
and
this
wasn't
like
well
think
about
this
funding
and
the
dire
need
for
some
of
the
projects
before
I.
Think
that
in
like
a
butthole
away
like
that
forward
is
funding,
the
project
would
not
move
forward
and
I'm.
Not
I,
wasn't
clear
on
that
from
here
bill
go
ahead,
Matt.
G
I
A
A
J
M
O
And
I'll
invite
our
Stephen
or
Peter
to
chime
in
here
too.
With
regard
to
Vanderbilt
I,
think
you
know,
one
of
the
things
that
we
had
discussed
as
a
team
was
was
again.
Vanderbilt
seems
to
have
a
lot
of
the
funding
that
they're
sourcing
and
really
home
funds
being
the
last
in
so
maybe
Stephen.
If
you
you
and
Peter
want
to
chime
in
and
really
give
some
insight.
As
to
your
approach
with
the
Vanderbilt
request,.
N
Sure
I'll
take
a
first
crack
and
then
I'll,
let
Peter
kind
of
come
behind
and
clean
up
my
mess,
but
as
it
were
so
I
think
a
couple
of
things
jump
out
to
me
about
Vanderbilt.
You
know
one
is
obviously
and
it's
it's
a
it's
a
it's
a
real
public
policy
kind
of
we
have
to
make
choices
challenge,
but
you
know
there's
definitely
a
school
of
thought
that
says:
hey
you
know
as
much
as
we
need
new
units.
N
We
also,
you
know,
should
invest
in
making
sure
that
we
don't
lose
units
that
we
already
have
that
are
affordable
and
so
preservation,
obviously
is,
is
also
a
strong
priority
in
in
many
parts
of
the
country
for
good
reason.
Just
looking
at
a
high
level.
What
I
would
say
is
you
know,
yeah
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars,
basically
out
of
32
million.
N
So
you
know
there's
the
seller
note
that
really
is
almost
a
almost
a
paper
transaction,
so
they're
able
to
have
a
the
sales
price
at
a
at
a
kind
of
more
of
an
appraised
value,
but
they're
not
really
getting
all
of
that
in
in
cash,
where
they're
kind
of
selling
it
to
themselves.
In
effect,
they're
they're
able
to
pay
off
the
mortgage
and
then
they're
taking
the
rest
back
in
a
seller
note.
So
it's
kind
of
a
paper
transaction,
but
it
gets
them.
N
Credits
on
that
amount,
they're
already
deferring
better
than
a
million
dollars
of
developer
fee
they've
got
General
partner,
Equity,
that's
being
contributed,
and
this
that
and
the
other
thing
so
to
the
degree
that
you
know,
NCR
is
kind
of
already
putting
a
lot
of
their
own
resources
into
the
deal.
You
know
I
think
that's
at
least
worth
noting.
N
C
Just
just
to
follow
on
that
Steve,
a
couple
of
additional
points.
One
of
all
of
the
multi-family
applicants
in
this
round,
National
Church
residences,
is-
is
showing
the
highest
flight
tech
pricing.
So
so,
in
part,
due
to
their
you
know,
capacity
and
experience
as
a
developer,
the
relations
they
have
the
relationships
they
have
in
the
equity
markets.
C
C
There's
a
there's,
a
balancing
act
there,
certainly
right
the
more
it
costs
to
operate
the
lower
The
Debt
Service.
You
can
lower
the
debt
that
you
can
service
and
and
the
more
Gap
you
need.
But
it's
also
as
an
underwriter,
encouraging
to
see
a
developer.
You
know
taking
a
conservative
approach
to
how
they're
going
to
manage
the
units.
C
Some
of
that
is
a
function
of
them
having
owned
and
operated
the
project
for
the
past
15
or
20
years,
and
knowing
kind
of
the
nuances
how
the
building
Works,
where
they
need
to
plug
holes
and
that
type
of
thing.
But,
as
I
said,
it's
it's
encouraging.
In
my
opinion,
when
a
developer
tends
to
be
more
conservative
in
those
projections
because
it
a
is
a
little
bit
more
transparent
and
B,
it
shows
that
they're.
C
G
So
I
don't
want
to
diminish
that,
but
in
looking
at
moving
projects
forward,
preserving
existing
units
is
important.
Providing
amenities
in
all
affordable
housing
is
important,
but
there
is
the
potential
that
by
not
allocating
to
the
other
projects,
that
they
won't
be
successful
in
a
lie:
Tech
realm,
because
for
those
people
going
into
an
application,
if
they
don't
have
a
fully
realized,
Capital
stack
to
produce
for
their
lie,
Tech
application,
they
won't
be
able
to
complete
the
application.
G
So
I
know
we
like
home
to
be
the
last
in,
or
at
least
in
after
other
major
sources
have
been
secured.
It
can
be
helpful
in
advancing
and
open
or
or
pending
application
as
well.
So
those
would
be
the
you
know
wt's
projects
in
Buncombe
and
Henderson
as
well
as
ldg's
project
in
Buncombe,
so
those
are
all
ones
that
are
actively
seeking
those
tax
credits,
so
that
could
be
the
difference
in
them
even
be
able
to
move
forward
in
an
application
cycle.
G
So
I
don't
want
to
lose
sight
of
of
that,
and
it
does
tie
into
the
Henderson
County
question.
I
had
so
I'm
curious
from
what
Henderson
County
representatives
of
you
know.
If
there
is
more
interest
in
trying
to
fund
that
rental
construction
project,
even
if
they
would
have
to
forego
some
of
their
down
payment
assistance
like
what
is
their
interest
level
in
that
project
in
Henderson
County
as
well.
So
that's
the
tie-in
and
Henderson
County
question
that
I
had.
A
D
D
Rehab
of
rental
housing
is
just
a
lower
priority
for
me
than
the
other
things
that
we
have.
The
potential
to
fund
and
I
am
only
one
vote,
but
I
I.
Don't
support
funding
that
project
and
I'm
not
going
to
vote
to
fund
that
project
and
that's
just
where
I
I
stand
with
it,
and
if
we
can't
come
to
a
resolution
regarding
giving
the
434
to
one
of
the
litec
projects,
then
I
would
suggest
giving
that
to
Mountain
housing
and
getting
them
even
closer
to
their
goal.
A
F
A
Going
to
hear
from
Hendersonville
Robin
my
concern
there
is
that
again
that
money
might
make
one
of
those
applications
stronger,
but
I
guess
it's.
None
of
them
are
rewarded
involved.
We
could
reallocate
my
chest
and
so
that's
what
the
creation
of
new
units
until
we
start
and
while
we
really
appreciate
what
you
said
about
amenities
too
Matt
I
think
it's
very
true.
I
just
didn't
get
friends
that
it
was
going
to
be
that
crucial.
F
I
know
from
the
planning
department,
kind
of
business,
Community
Development
side
of
the
county.
Rental
construction
is
definitely
a
higher
priority
again,
not
having
enough
physical
units
and
I
think
you
know,
especially
in
our
comprehensive
plan
and
moving
forward.
That
is
something
that
we
are
making
a
high
priorities:
National
Construction,
so
I,
would
you
know
I'm
leaning
a
little
bit
more
towards
that
as
well.
F
F
A
I
I
This
project
has
been
around
a
couple
Cycles
now
and
so
I
think
I,
like
the
new
construction
I'm
a
little
torn
because
I
do
support
the
the
efforts
of
habitat
with
down
payment
assistance
and
trying
to
get
folks
into
those
units,
but
I
think
the
priority
should
be
getting
more
units
on
the
ground
and
the
the
rental
construction
would
get
more
units
versus
what
habitat
would
would
put
forward.
So.
A
C
A
I
K
So
I
just
wanted
to
throw
out,
would
it
be
beneficial
at
all
to
I,
know
TDA
in
their
report
on
the
habitat
project
said
that,
because
each
each
home
could
really
be
considered
its
own
award
on
its
own,
that
amount
could
potentially
be
prorated
down
to
where
they
could
still
have
some
down
payment
assistance,
but
maybe
not
the
full.
The
full
number
of
houses.
M
G
And
I
think
my
question
is
more
a
question
that
the
applicant
themselves
would
have
to
answer,
but
staff
may
kind
of
have
already
had
these
conversations
with
them,
but
wdd's
project
in
Henderson
County.
So
let's
say
if
we
tried
to
allocate
four
hundred
thousand
dollars
to
that
project,
or
you
know
some
amount
that
balance
amount
to
that
project
is
they
are
there's
going
to
be
created
a
gap
so
assuming
that
the
performer
that
they
were
using
as
the
basis
to
make
the
level
of
request
they
needed
from
the
Consortium?
G
You
know
whatever
isn't
funded
of
the
898
000
request.
They
have
to
have
a
different
source
to
put
in
that
space
in
order
for
the
application
again
to
move
forward,
so
anything
that's
not
funded.
They
have
to
identify
a
different
source
to
make
the
performer
complete
for
their
application.
I
guess
my
question
is:
do
they
have
another
alternative
source
to
fill
in
the
Gap
that
that
would
still
create,
because
otherwise,
then
we're
just
putting
that
434
000
as
a
placeholder
for
a
project?
That's
not
going
to
be
able
to
to
even
move
to
application.
C
This
is
Peter
again
so
just
real
quickly
to
echo
on
Matt's
comments.
There
I
believe
that
the
last
project
on
the
list
for
wdt
is
their
white
pine,
Villas
proposal
and
part
of
the
challenge.
Further
just
to
again
to
to
emphasize
Matt's
point
is
the
pro
forma
that
they
presented
us
when
they
presented
it
to
us.
Even
if
you
funded
the
full
898
414
still
had
a
1.4
million
dollar
Gap,
so
the
performer
they
originally
submitted
was
imbalanced.
C
L
C
Don't
have
the
kind
of
temporal
presence
to
know
which
are
of
those
two
is
more
important
from
a
geographical
standpoint
or
which
one's
been
in
the
queue
longer,
but
certainly
Villas
at
Haywood
is
was
presented
with
a
balanced
performer
that
type
of
thing
just
just
for
a
quick
reference
there.
Thank
you.
That's.
A
I
Madam,
chair
can
I
ask
Peter
a
question
and
I:
don't
know
whether
Peter
knows
but
I
remember,
hearing
some
and
somewhere
and
just
if
you
look
at
the
scoring
criteria
for
White
Pines
that
and
I
know
we.
We
deferred
housing
assistance
program
down
the
road
because
they
couldn't
fund
infrastructure,
but
do
I
remember
hearing
that
from
a
latex
scoring
the
White
Pines
project
was
still
not
in
a
great
position
from
a
scoring
position
and
I.
A
Great,
it's
a
good
point
too
one
more
question:
that's
because
it
worked,
but
one
on
here
we
have
to
discuss
it.
I'd
like
to
hear
from
Matt
cable
on
that,
because
Buncombe
County
on
mayor
Bell,
the
ldg
development,
the
500
000
effect,
isn't
enough
put
them
over
the
line.
It's
not
even
really
close
right!
There's
a
big
ass
County
behind
that
as
well
foreign.
G
Maribel
has
made
a
request
for
over
9
million
dollars
in
a
loan
to
Buncombe
County,
so
the
the
asset
extortion
was
relatively
small
compared
to
that
Lake
Shore
Villas.
We
have
an
existing
commitment
through
our
arpa
funds
that
was
actually
used
to
assist
MHO
in
acquiring
property
and
they've
requested
a
loan
amount
from
the
county
as
well.
G
For
that
particular
project,
that's
over
three
million
dollars.
So
there'll,
be
you
know:
six
million
dollar
potential
investment
in
that
project.
The
bill
is
at
Haywood,
so
that
particular
project
has
requested
the
same
amount
of
the
Consortium
and
the
county,
and
that
was
our
advisement
to
them,
so
that
is
their
real
Gap
right.
So
if
the
Consortium
provides
funding
the
request,
the
county
is
reduced
by
that
amount
in
the
case
of
Maribel
I,
think
Consortium
does
it
provide
funding?
G
Then
that's
a
gap,
that's
created
that
we
have
to
reconcile
and
that
perform
up
on
the
county
side.
So
I
mean
the
county.
Has
an
interest
in
all
of
these
projects
advancing
and
have
existing
commitments
on
two
of
the
three
projects
and
potentially
will
have
a
commitment
on
all
three
projects
in
the
next
budget
cycle,
so
in
fiscal
year
23..
G
So
we
definitely
have
an
interest
in
in
funding
support
on
any
and
all
of
the
three
projects.
At
this
point,
our
prioritization
of
Lakeshore
Villas
is
due
to
the
fact
that
it
has
an
existing
tax
credit
commitment.
We
have
an
existing
investment
in
that
project.
With
our
arpa
funding,
we
have
an
existing
ask
to
our
to
our
Florida
housing
committee
and
the
in
the
County
Commission,
ultimately
to
provide
a
loan
for
that
project.
G
A
Thank
you,
Matt
I'll,
commenting
for
us
and
then
Emily.
So
what
I
want
to
bring
that
is
Haywood
that
if
we
were
to
fund
them,
434
in
the
county
could
also
do
400
things
400.
That
would
actually
get
them
over
the
line.
That's
their
true
Gap,
and
that's
that
feels
pretty
good
to
me.
Forest
and
then
Emily.
J
Yes,
the
geographic
distribution
within
welcome
County
impacts.
Each
of
us
because
we're
we're
closer
to
various
spots
and
the
Maribel
project
in
Weaverville
is
of
interest
to
Madison
County
a
little
bit
too,
because
that
would
be
the
closest
to
us,
but
I
understand
always
I'm
going
to
say
that
we
got
to
do
that.
J
Just
I'm
not
asking
a
question
necessarily
here,
but
I
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
looking
at
the
entirety
of
Buncombe
County
we've
got
a
project
down
in
Arden.
That's
very
close
to
getting
done
looks
like
if
we
can,
possibly
if
we
can
get
all
this
done
so
understand
that
but
I
also
see
something
that's
on
the
Northern
end
of
the
county.
That's
seeing
starting
to
see
the
level
of
growth
we
saw
10
years
ago
in
the
south
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
kind
of
balanced
there.
A
G
G
I
can
say
what
our
process
is,
so
just
for
clarification.
We
have
an
application
window
that
opens
it
closed
in
February.
Those
applications
are
reviewed
by
the
affordable
housing
committee,
which
is
a
subset
of
the
board
and
they,
as
a
subcommittee
of
the
board,
make
a
recommendation
to
the
full
board
on
which
project
should
receive
an
allocation
of
typically
general
fund
dollars,
and
then
that
goes
into
our
budgeting
process.
G
So
it
becomes
like
a
request
from
in
the
budgeting
process
for
the
general
fund,
so
we
can't
commit
anything
really
until
July
1
when
the
budget
is
adopted
and
in
place,
but
that's
the
process
so
we're
actually
in
middle
of
application
review.
Now
the
committee
will
make
its
recommendation
at
the
end
of
April.
G
The
board
will
approve
the
budget
sometime
in
June
for
a
statue
and
then
the
actual
commitment
is
formal
and
official
July
1
with
the
budget
creation.
So
you
know
each
of
these
projects
is
being
reviewed
by
the
committee
in
a
public
setting
a
lot
of
analysis
at
their
performers,
identifying
any
existing
gaps
and
determining
you
know.
The
action
by
the
Consortium
to
allocate
funding
will
become
part
of
that.
G
You
know
understanding
of
where
their
project
is
and
and
where
a
project
doesn't
receive
that
funding
where
it
was
contemplated
to
be
there
and
then
the
application
materials
we
received.
We'll
have
to
ask
the
applicant:
how
are
you
going
to
without
that
funding
or
that
level
of
funding
fill
that
Gap?
So
it's
not
a
decision.
We
met
we
make
at
the
staff
level,
and
you
know,
staff
are
the
representatives
to
the
Consortium.
So
we
look
at
projects
and
try
to
evaluate
which
ones
we
support
as
a
county.
G
At
this
time,
yes,
they're
at
their
open
application
and
request
to
us
is,
is
the
largest
request
it's
within
our
limit,
so
we
do
cap
the
amount
that
we
can
invest
based
on
a
unit
construction
cost.
So
it's
a
percent
of
that
unit,
construction
cost.
So
what
they've
asked
for
is
within
our
ability
to
fund,
but
this
is
a
half
million
dollar
Gap.
The
other
reality
that
we
haven't
even
touched
on
is
performance
change
by
the
minute.
G
A
H
So
what
I'm
hearing
you
say
Matt
is
that
that
well
in
the
project,
sources
and
uses
submission
from
the
Maribel
project,
they
have
listed
Buncombe
County
as
a
1.2
million
dollar
contribution
and
so
you're
saying
that
that's
not
even
on
there
yet
and
that's
a
big
red
flag
in
in
my
mind,
and
then
it's
already
listed
in
there.
So
we
sources
yeah.
G
So
to
be
clear,
we
have
an
existing
commitment,
so
they
were
awarded
funds.
Last
cycle
and
they've
asked
for
additional
funding
from
the
county
with
a
new
performa,
so
they
have
an
existing
commitment
that
does
exist
in
that
amount
and
then
there's
an
additional
request
to
the
county,
so
basically
increasing
the
commitment
based
on
a
number
of
changes
to
the
project
market
conditions,
loan
interest
rates-
yes,.
A
Anybody
else
have
comments
or
questions
because
I'm
hearing
what
I
think
is
getting
behind
those
of
England,
because
it
has
the
smallest
Gap.
We
want
all
these
projects
to
move
forward
first
of
all,
but
it
has
someone.
Has
this
Gap?
This
is
a
realistic,
app.
It's
not
going
to
have
a
10
million
dollar
assets,
other
body
to
put
some
over
the
line
account
and
do
a
400
with
it
as
well,
and.
A
A
Project
is
great
and
we
review
and
even
Buncombe
County
we'd
love
to
see
it
happen,
but
there's
so
much
unknown
and
maybe
they'll
be
awarded
this
fall
and
if
that's
the
case,
because
I'm
back
in
reality
but
I
guess
you
know
for
sake,
because
how
many
of
us
are
on
screen.
How
much
has
been
said
I'm
going
to
suggest
we
I
think
I'm
here,
it's
moved
the
434
there.
But
if
this
is
not
your
feeling
now
as
you're
trying
to
speak
up,
raise
your
thumb
raise
your
hand
whatever.
K
A
D
A
K
A
K
O
And
if
I
may,
chime
in
I
I
will
say
that
we
need
to
examine
our
previous
year's
choto
allocations
to
ensure
that
we
have
the
right
figures.
Jonathan
mentioned
earlier
in
the
meeting
that
we
would
need
to
look
into
that.
I
do
want
to
say
to
the
committee
that
we
need
to
look
at
the
prior
years
prior
to
fiscal
year,
2223
to
really
understand
if
there
are
any
additional
carry
forward.
Chotos
I
would
also
say
that
if
we
do
find
that
there
are,
there
are
Toto
funds
that
have
been
returned.
O
I
guess
there's
something
about
Toto
funds
that
might
have
the
specific
requirements
that
kind
of
limit
their
use
or
or
the
eligible
entities
that
can
use
them
that
we
may
be
able
to
consider
additional
funding
for
MHO
to
supplement
what
we've
got
earmarked
already,
and
so.
However,
I
do
need
to
take
the
time
to
ensure
that
we
have
the
right
figures,
but
I
do
think
we
could.
O
We
could
further
close
that
Gap
with
any
of
that
additional
return
funding
from
the
choto
prior
Year's
request
and
in
Jonathan
eye's
communication
we're
estimating
anywhere
from
200
additional
funds
from
prior
years.
Prior
to
2023-
and
we
still
got
to
figure
out
that
2023
to
make
sure
that
our
numbers
match.
But
it
could
be
at
the
minimum
200
000,
which
would
would
help
further
close.
That
Gap
and.
N
This
is
Steve
two
quick
points
as
as
we've
discussed,
any
shutoff
funds
from
your
2020
allocation
or
prior
are
now
in
a
position
that
they
could
be
moved
out
of
the
choto
set-aside.
So
you,
you
know
they're,
just
recognizing,
there's
some
optionality
there
with
with
prior
year
funds
that
they
don't
have
to
stay
locked
in
the
choto
set
aside.
N
It
doesn't
mean
that
you
should
thumb
your
nose
at
choto's,
but
it
also
gives
you
the
flexibility
not
to
let
that
sort
of
unnecessarily
distort
decision
making
right
and
not
suggesting
that
that's
kind
of
the
direction
you're
going.
But
it's
that
that's
just
the
way.
I
talk
about
that
that
flexibility,
sort
of
writ
large
with
with
PJs
everywhere
and
then
again
and
I
I
apologize
I,
don't
remember
who
made
the
point,
but
we
will
absolutely
concur
with
that.
You
know
performance,
Change
Daily.
N
N
You
know,
if
you
can,
if
you
can
get
up
into
the
you
know,
750
800
000
range,
which
is
pretty
much
where
you're
at
it
would
it
would
look
on
the
surface
like
you
know,
a
pretty
easy
way
for
them
to
at
least
plausibly
balance.
Their
deal
would
be
to
you
know
to
defer
about
that
much
more
in
fee
still
leaving
them
at
that
point.
N
Only
only
with
roughly
half
of
the
fee
deferred,
which
is
you
know,
kind
of
a
rule
of
thumb
that
often
we'd
want
to
try
to
not
have
people
skinny
their
deal
up
so
much
that
they're
deferring
more
than
half
of
the
fee
and
recognizing
that
it's
still
a
really
difficult
time
in
which
to
you
know
nail
any
of
these
things
down.
Just
given
the
the
macroeconomic
environment.
A
N
Yeah
I
mean,
and
not
to
get
too
too
deep
into
that,
but
it's
it's
sort
of
this
weird
little
Quirk.
It
was
frankly
an
unintended
consequence
of
of
this,
of
the
language
that
got
used
to
suspend
the
24-month
deadline
for
committing
Toto
funds
and
it
had
the
intended
consequence
of
taking
the
deadline
out
of
play
and
the
unintended
consequence
of
once
those
funds
have
aged
by
24
months.
They
could
be
moved
out
of
a
set-aside.
A
Thank
you
and
it's
helpful
to
know
that
if
they
do,
they
have
any
other
developer
theme,
which
is
something
more
commonly
across
applications.
But
if
we
found
the
434
they
could
reduce
their
develop
developers
in
hit.
Go
okay,
so
I
guess
my
question.
We
were
really
going
on
one
here
and
I:
don't
want
to
keep
you
guys.
I
know
everybody
has
a
busy
day
and
job
ahead.
J
J
A
J
C
Miss
Turner:
this
is
Peter
just
real
quickly,
just
to
make
sure
and
and
I
I
know
you
all
will
make
the
most
informed
decision,
but
just
as
a
one
quick
reminder
about
the
Villas
at
Haywood,
this
is
a
a
nine
percent
competitive
application
to
nchfa
that
we
don't
know
whether
or
not
they
will
be
awarded.
Certainly
they
have
to
present
a
balanced
budget
and
your
money
would
help
in
that,
but
they
don't
have
the
award
in
hand,
unlike,
for
example,
Fairhaven
Meadows.
C
The
other
thing,
I
would
say
too,
is
of
all
the
multi-family
applications.
This
will
be
the
highest
home
investment
per
unit
of
any
of
them
with
the
lowest
credit
pricing,
so
they've
they've,
just
to
kind
of
put
it
in
context.
It
doesn't
mean
it's
not
a
worthy
project,
but
all
things
being
equal
they're,
getting
the
least
amount
of
equity
and
asking
for
the
largest
per
unit
subsidy.
Just
so
that
you're
all
aware.
A
This
is
helpful
and
every
time
you
guys
see
a
little
more
in-depth
critique
instance
feasibility.
So
how
about
I
just
ask
taking
into
accounting
occurred
today
and
that
this
absorption
is
interested
in
creating
new
units?
Dispersed
County
area
of
the
remaining
I
understand
all
59
applications
that
are
not
funded
or.
A
N
Yeah
no
well
and
I
guess
I
was
just
about
to
you,
know,
chime
in
after
Peter
and
say
I
mean
I
I
think
this
has
been
really
fascinating
for
us
and
and
both
of
us
early
in
our
careers
used
to
sit
in
meetings.
You
know
allocation
meetings.
You
know
having
these
same
kind
of
conversations
and
I
I.
You
guys
are
in
both
a
an
enviable
in
an
unenviable
position
right.
The
enviable
position
is
you've
got.
N
You
know,
there's
none
of
the
deals
that
are
up
on
the
screen
that
we
would
say
like
man,
that's
just
a
non-starter
right
like
every
one
of
these
deals,
you
know
is
more
likely
than
not
to
be
viable
if
you
are
able
to
provide
the
funding
they've
asked
for
and
if
you
know
a
couple,
other
things
break
their
way.
You
know,
given
that
anybody
that
doesn't
have
a
nine
percent
award
in
hand.
N
You
know
only
probably
has
about
a
one
in
three
chance
of
getting
that
nine
percent
award
and
and
so
it
at
some
level.
You
know
all
of
these
things
are
a
little
bit
kind
of
on
the
margins
right
in
terms
of
like
you
know,
an
extra
Penny
here,
a
half
a
cent
there.
You
know
all
of
that
I
I
think
the
well.
You
know
one
of
the
things
I
would
say
about.
N
Mirabelle
was
that
you
know
it
does
produce
the
largest
number
of
deeply
affordable
units
at
30
Ami
of
any
deal
right.
So
that's
a
there's,
a
tremendous,
the
lower
we
go
on
the
income
scale.
It's
it's!
You
know
pretty.
You
know
it's
the
easiest
thing
in
the
world
for
everybody
to
look
and
say
this
is
prima
facie
that
you
know
the
units
are
more
desperately
needed,
the
lower
we
go
on
the
income
scale.
So
that's
a
very
attractive
piece
to
that
project.
N
You
know
again
the
downside
is
or
or
if
you
want
to
make
the
criticism-
you
know
you're
only
about
one
percent
of
the
deal.
There
ought
to
be
some
way
for
them
to
figure
out
how
to
make
a
deal
work
if
they
only
have
to
close
a
one
percent
Gap,
and
then
you
know
again
the
the
Villas
at
at
hayrid
is,
you
know,
kind
of
more
put
together
and
ready
to
go
than
white
pine,
and
you
know
so.
I
I
think
it's
really
hard.
I
mean
it.
N
I
just
want
to
recognize.
At
the
end
of
the
day,
it's
a
something
of
a
qualitative.
You
know
judgment
that
a
lot
of
people
are,
you
know
anybody
any
any
anybody
looking
in
that
doesn't
get.
The
call
is
going
to
have
the
opportunity
to
say
well,
I
think
that
was
subjective
and
so
that
in
that
sense
you
guys
are
in
a
very
unenviable
position.
Well,.
A
A
M
H
What
I
was
going
to
say
is
actually
I
mean
I,
don't
want
to
make
more
work
for
staff,
but
it
kind
of
sounds
like
we're.
The
Consortium
is
comfortable
making
a
recommendation
on
those
you
know
tops
what
is
that
five
items
on
this
list
and
then
reconvening
once
we
get
a
better
idea
of
the
choto
funds
that
are
available,
and
perhaps
we
could
get
additional
information
on
what
the
Gap
would
be
for
some
of
these
other
projects
in
the
rental
construction.
Do.
F
O
B
Yeah
the
submission
will
be
in
May,
so
it's
a
matter
of
backing
up
the
deadline
to
do
public
30-day
public
comment.
So
I
do.
Ideally,
if
there
needed
to
be
further
consideration
about
the
Consortium,
it
would
need
to
happen
this
month.
That
would
provide
enough
enough
space
to
to
do
that.
Public
comment
period,
And,
I.
K
A
Clear
on
what
Toto
from
previous
years
may
or
may
not
be
available,
200
300,
400,
500
000
we
get
back
together
and
we
have
to
have
a
quorum
which
is
eight
of
you
more
before
the
end
of
this
month,
or
maybe
the
first
week
of
April,
and
we
then
try
and
sort
through
which
of
these
larger
tax
credit
application
projects
we
want
to
disperse
funds
to
at
that
point,
maybe
we'll
be
able
to
do
two.
Does
that
feel
good?
Okay,
so
I
see
Karen,
has
her
hand
up
and
then
I'm
gonna
make
a
motion.
L
I
would
completely
support
that
I.
Just
think
we
need
a
bit
more
time
to
and
to
really
know
what,
how
many
dollars
we
have
and
really
understand.
You
know
get
into
the
details.
I
just
feel
like
we
are
jumping
ahead,
just
because
we're
out
of
time,
and
we
all
know
that
this
is
too
important
to
make
a
wreck
that
type
of
decision
and
I
think
we're
all
committed
to
devoting
the
time
between
now
and
the
end
of
the
month.
B
Yeah
I
just
wanted
to
maybe
revisit,
maybe
for
the
next
meeting
consideration
of
the
Henderson
County
Habitat,
the
down
payment
assistance
allocation
about
sort
of
scaling
that,
especially
if
we're
looking
at
trying
to
fully
fund
or
fund
as
much
of
the
tax
credit
process,
projects
for
consideration
and
that
application
and
then
reconsider
where
DPA
lands.
Once
that
has
been
completed.
A
O
A
So
we
leave
it
all
open,
we
don't
make
any
motions
today
we
retain
which
you're
going
to
have
calendar
invites
in
your
inbox
soon
need
you
to
actually
reply
yes
and
stick
to
it
so
that
we
know
we
have
Quorum,
we
don't
hit
anybody's
deadlines
and
make
the
Panic
okay,
then
I
believe
we're
going
to
actually
not
close.
This
item
we're
going
to
continue
this
item
to
our
next
agenda,
and
that
brings
us
to
item
number
five,
which
is
public
comment,
who's
I'm,
not
sure
who's
actually
Manning,
the
phones.
A
A
Okay,
it
was
a
really
deep,
thorough
conversation.
Everybody
I
really
appreciate
all
of
your
time
and
thanks
for
so
many
of
you
showing
up.
Obviously
these
are
such
important
projects
to
all
of
our
communities,
and
we
will
be
in
touch
very
shortly
with
calendar,
invites
and
trying
to
make
sure
we
get
enough
of
us
present
to
read
discuss
this.
Thank.