►
From YouTube: Asheville Regional Housing Consortium – March 29, 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
You're
muted,
thank
you.
Good
morning,
everyone
I'm
Sage
Turner,
chair
of
the
Asheville
Regional
Housing
Consortium
I'd,
like
to
welcome
you
to
the
March
29
2023
Consortium
meeting
hard
to
believe
it's
the
end
of
March.
Already
we
are
streaming
live
on
our
virtual
engagement
Hub,
which
is
accessible
through
the
virtual
engagement
company.
That's
on
the
front
page
of
Asheville
City's
website.
We
also
have
an
option
for
the
public
to
listen,
live
by
phone
and
to
do
that
and
call
a
number.
That
number
is.
B
B
B
C
B
J
C
We
got
to
do
this.
Roll
call
vote
thing,
I'm
gonna,
do
it
well
I'll
go
by
screen,
then
Matt.
C
J
K
L
This
off
sure,
I'm
happy
to
I'll,
say
a
few
remarks.
First,
I
want
to
say
that
congratulations,
the
home
art
plan
was
approved
at
city
council
last
night.
That
is
the
final
step
that
enables
us
to
submit
a
plan
to
HUD
today,
so
that
is
in
process.
We
have
the
entire
package
with
signatures,
the
resolution
it
is
ready
to
go,
and
so
we're
uploading
that
to
the
HUD
website
as
we
speak.
So
congratulations
to
this
body.
L
We
really
appreciate
everyone
attending
those
meetings
and
helping
us
make
it
happen,
and
so
I
think
it's
something
we
can
all
be
really
proud
of.
So
just
thanks
to
this
group
appreciate
y'all,
but
okay,
let's
get
down
to
business,
so
I
do
want
to
acknowledge
and
share
appreciation
to
Stephen
lantham
consultant
he's
listening
in
I
believe
he's
on
vacation,
so
I
just
want
to
show
a
depth
of
gratitude
to
Stephen
for
joining
today,
but
we
want
to
launch
back
into
the
funding
recommendations.
L
I
do
want
to
just
go
ahead
and
share
my
screen,
so
we
can
get
right
down
to
it.
I'll
say
that
you
know
picking
up
where
we
left
off.
We
did
show
a
revised
funding
allocation
spreadsheet.
We
worked
on
that
really
soon
after
the
meeting
had
concluded
last
week
and
so
I
hope
everyone's
had
a
chance
to
walk
through
this
we're
kind
of
doing
a
couple
things
using
some
color
to
really
demonstrate
how
this
funds
kind
of
go
out
as
well
as
just
be
explicit
about
some
of
the
choto
funding.
L
So
picking
back
up
where
we
left
off,
as
the
conversation
had
came
to
a
to
a
close,
we
all
acknowledge
that
there
was
a
need
to
really
refine
these
numbers
and
ensure
that
we're
carrying
forward
any
of
the
previous
return
funds
that
needed
to
be
reallocated
in
this
cycle.
Quick,
shout
out
to
Jonathan
Jones,
who
really
helped
us
to
piece
all
this
together.
L
One
of
the
flaws
that
we
had
in
our
previous
funding
table
is
that
we
had
really
lumped
together
all
the
returned
funds
of
this
950
000
without
truly
acknowledging
what
those
funds
were
tied
to
and
when
I
say
that
I
say
specifically
the
Toto
element
of
that
kind
of
pot
of
funding
that
we
were
looking
at
last
time.
L
First
line,
our
program
income
that
came
from
a
loan
repayment
there
a
little
higher
than
normal,
so
there
it
goes
now
you're,
seeing
that
choto
delineation,
so
1920
Total
return
funds
or
Toto
for
funds
that
were
returned
by
CHC
Madison,
as
well
as
a
2223
Reserve.
So
again,
Shoto
kind
of
our
common
theme
I
think
that's
going
to
be
for
our
conversation
today
and
then
also
reflecting
an
updated
number
showing
that
those
funds
that
were
returned,
the
non-toto
estimate
is,
is
520..
L
L
I
want
to
also
just
be
clear
that
this
is
already
includes
that
Administration
line
item
so
I
just
wanted
to
be
super
clear
that
we
are
already
putting
that
administrative
line
item
on
the
table,
and
so
that
is
now
shown
on
the
funding
table,
because
we
need
to
take
action
to
make
sure
that
happens.
L
So
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that's
also
reflected
as
part
of
the
recommendations
so
with
that
I
think
our
our
our
plan
for
today
is
to
really
pick
up
where
we
left
off
allow
stage
to
really
administer
and
facilitate
the
conversations
from
here.
Just
a
couple:
more
changes
that
I
made
through
the
table,
given
where
we
are
with
this
Shoto
allocation
I,
went
ahead
and
just
moved
any
funding
that
we
had
talked
about
for
Mountain,
housing
into
that
Toto
column
and
so
I.
Think.
L
Last
time
we
looked
at
that
number
of
750
and
so
I
brought
that
over
into
your
Toto
column,
to
be
clear
on
that
piece,
but
otherwise
this
is
pretty
much
just
picking
up
where
we
left
off
and
are
ready
to
have
the
conversation
so
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions,
but
otherwise
Sage
I
think
I'll
turn
it
over
to
you
to
just
kind
of
pick
up.
The
funding
discussion.
L
L
And
I'll
just
I'll
say
you
know
my
my
gut
right
now
is
that
I
would
like
to
hear
more
about
that.
So
I
think
it
would
be
helpful
for
us
to
understand
in
the
future,
because
again,
as
we
saw
these
carry
forwards,
what
we
did
see
was
this
pattern
right,
that
it
is
difficult
to
look
at
the
reallocation
of
those
Toto
funds
for
projects.
I
think
the
benefit
right
now
is
that
we
do
have
a
Toto
project
that
seems
highly
likely
to
proceed.
L
Is
shovel
ready,
ready
to
go
that
Delta
is
only
83,
and
so,
while
I
think
it
might
be
helpful
knowledge
to
have
going
forward
My
Hope
Is
that
we
can.
We
can
look
at
fully
funding
the
Toto
project
that
we
have
on
hand
and
then
perhaps
coming
to
our
next
meeting,
with
that
full
awareness
around
how
Toto
funds
can
be
otherwise
obligated.
L
I
I
too,
want
to
have
that
conversation
with
our
HUD
field
office
as
we
as
we
as
we
shift
towards
that.
But
if
we
can
take
a
minute
Stephen
if
you
want
to
just
educate
us
on
on
on
your
thoughts
in
that
regard,
but
otherwise
we'll
continue
sure.
M
I'll
try
to
give
you
the
the
elevator
pitch
version.
So,
as
many
of
you
probably
know
several
years
ago,
HUD
got
Congress
to
include
language
in
the
Appropriations
bill
that
suspends
the
24-month
deadline.
That
is
a
statutory
part
of
the
home
program.
M
If
you
don't
have
funds
committed
within
24
months,
they
would
be
de-obligated
and
lost
back
to
the
the
the
gaping
hole
that
is
the
federal
bunch
of
deficit
and
that
24-month
commitment
deadline
really
distorted
decision-making,
particularly
when
the
program
had
had
been
shrunk,
all
the
way
down
to
a
billion
dollar
program.
M
Unfortunately,
when
they
did
that
there
was
almost
a
drafting
error
or
more
of
an
oversight
in
that
it
real
it
suspended
the
24
month,
commitment
deadline
for
everything,
but
the
choto
set
aside,
because
the
choto
set-aside
is
in
a
different
part
of
the
act
and
also
references.
24
months,
a
few
years
later,
they
were
able
to
get
Congress
to
insert
language
in
the
Appropriations
bill
that
had
the
was
intended
to
suspend
the
24-month
deadline
as
it
related
to
getting
Toto
funds
committed
after
that
was
done.
M
Those
funds
from
the
churro
set
aside
are
no
longer
in
no
longer
must
be
left
in
the
choto
set
aside
and
could
be
transferred
out
over
into
What's
called
the
en
or
the
entitlement
sub
fund,
which
is
basically
the
everything
else,
except
for
Advent
portion
of
the
program,
so
that
FY
19
funds
I'm,
assuming
that
those
are
federal
fiscal
year.
19
funds
in
your
program
1920.,
because
those
are
now
more
than
24
months
old.
Those
funds
could
be
transferred
from
the
choto
set
aside
the
CR
into
the
en.
M
Now
you
don't
have
to
you,
don't
have
to
do
all
of
it,
but
just
know
that
once
those
funds
have
aged
by
24
months
plus
the
way
the
deadline
works
is
24
months
from
the
end
of
the
month
in
which
HUD
signs
the
grant.
So
it
could
be
24
months.
M
Or
24
months
and
28
days
or
whatever,
but
but
once
they're
24
months
old,
then
you've
got
flexibility
as
a
PJ
to
move
those
out
of
the
choto
set
aside
and
and
do
other
things
with
them.
That
would
not
necessarily
be
eligible
from
the
set-aside.
So,
for
example,
you
could
use
it
for
tbra
or
you
could
use
it
for
a
development
activity
with
a
group
that
didn't
quite
meet
all
of
the
choto
requirements
or
something
like
that.
M
So
you've
got
a
lot
of
flexibility
with
those
older
funds
with
the
with
what
you
currently
got.
What
that
means
is
the
the
750
there's?
No
there's
no
problem
at
all
in
funding
funding
that,
but
that
83
is
not
kind
of
Trapped
In,
The,
choto
Reserve
and
could
be.
You
know,
pulled
over
to
help.
You
know
flesh
out
the
the
award
to
something
else.
If
need
be.
B
E
I'll,
just
just
to
have
somebody
say
something:
I'll
and
I'm
thinking
bars
for
jumping
in
as
well,
but
no
I
think
it's
fun
to
move
the
83.
Obviously
I
think
we
have
a
Toto
project
and
we're
able
to
fund
a
Toyota
project,
so
I
think
we
should.
We
should
do
that
and
I'm
sorry
I
missed
the
last
meeting.
I
will
say
there
are
others
that
have
been
on
this
Consortium
longer
than
me,
but
I
will
and
obviously
the
spreadsheet
shows
this
it
really.
E
E
E
B
B
Yeah
Matt
cable.
Is
that
your
hand
up
yeah.
H
Hey
yes,
good
morning,
I
mean
I
think
there
is
a
positive
with
the
change
in
allowing
those
funds
to
move
from
non-chota
projects.
It's
particularly
challenging
in
some
communities.
You
know
we
don't
have
that
many
chodo
organizations
right,
but
other
communities
have
probably
even
less
so
that
flexibility.
H
The
thing
that
I'm
concerned
about-
and
it's
just
something
that
I
think
we
would
think
about
in
future
rounds-
is
the
the
set
aside
for
chodo
is
not
often
significant
enough
in
a
single
year
to
impact
a
project
without
other
non-shoto
funds.
So
I
think
you
know.
Obviously
we
have
funds
that
are
sitting
here
from
several
years
ago.
We
want
to
try
to
deploy
them,
so
I
think
it's
a
reasonable
course
of
action
to
to
use
some
prior
year,
Chota
also
reallocate
it.
H
So
we
can
support
that
project
and
others,
but
I.
Just
you
know,
thinking
about
charity
support.
Long
term
is
basically
two
years
of
Bank
charity
to
make
a
project
even
make
sense,
with
real
investment,
so
I
hate
to
get
to
year
three
and
and
start
reallocating,
so
just
kind
of
keeping
that
in
mind
I'm
not
opposed
to
Shifting
the
83,
but.
H
I'm
not
opposed
to
shifting
it
at
this
point
because,
as
has
been
mentioned,
you
know
the
the
applicant
made
clarification
that
we
can
support
that
project
with
a
750,
000
commitment,
and
so
you
know
I
think
in
order
to
fund
as
many
projects
as
possible,
shifting
that
to
a
non-shoto,
we'll
both
meet
what
they've
requested
and
allow
for
some
additional
projects
to
pretend
to
be
supported.
H
You
know,
I
will
again
be
transparent.
This
applicant
is
requesting
funding
from
Buckner
County
and
any
home
funding
not
received,
creates
a
gap
in
their
Capital
stack.
So
we
you
know,
and
the
interest
of
dancing
that
project
the
more
funny
they
can
receive.
The
better
off
the
project
is
in
terms
of
not
having
a
gap,
but
again
they
indicated
that
750
000
would
allow
them
to
proceed
so
I.
Think
that
makes
sense
to
reallocate
to
a
non-shoto
from
that
prior
year.
D
I
know
thoughts
about
this
in
general,
but
I,
don't
like
shifting
shuttle
funds
to
non-shoto
activities
because
of
the
purpose
behind
those
funds.
I
don't
feel
strongly
about
it.
One
way
or
the
other.
D
The
83
when
we
combine
it
with
the
556
you
know
is,
could
perhaps
go
a
long
way
with
one
of
the
other
projects,
but
the
556
could
also
go
a
long
way
with
one
of
the
other
projects.
It's
actually
more
than
ldg
is
asking
for
of
all
things
being
equal
I
think
I
would
raise
mho's
allocation
by
the
83.
B
N
Yeah
I
think
that
there's
a
lot
of
Merit
in
taking
the
time
to
look
at
all
of
the
different
projects
and
seeing
if
there
is
a
different
one
that
we
want
to
fund
personally,
I
I
would
align
with
what
Robin
said.
I
really
liked
the
application
and
the
project
for
Mountain,
housing
and
and
so
I'm
certainly
not
opposed
to
moving
it.
N
If
we
find
a
if
there's
consensus
among
the
group
that
there
needs
to
be
that
that
money
would
be
better
spent
funding
a
different
program,
but
I
did
really
like
the
mountain
housing
program
project
itself.
So
I
would
certainly
not
be
opposed
to
allocating
that
83
000
for
them
as
well.
E
Thanks
Sage
I
tend
to
do
a
lawn
with
her
Robbins
at,
but
maybe
maybe
just
to
help
me
and
some
of
the
newer
members
of
this
group,
because
it
is,
it
is
hard
to
learn
all
the
acronyms
and
kind
of
figure.
Everything
out
and
you
know
I
know
at
least
Sam's
here
his
first
meeting.
So
maybe,
if,
if
the
staff,
could
you
explain
and
I'm
sorry,
if
you
did
this
at
the
last
minute,
but
maybe
a
little
more
detail
like
what
is
the
significance
of
qualifying
for
the
choto
designation
and
maybe
like?
E
M
At
the
very
beginning,
like
a
lot
of
legislation,
there
was
actually
a
proposal
at
the
time
back
in
the
late
80s
early
90s,
to
create
a
separate
program
just
for
community-based
non-profit
organizations,
and
the
way
that
came
together
was
the
home
program
was
the
was
the
train
that
was
leaving
the
legislative
station,
and
so
they
created
this
15
satisfied
within
the
program
for
groups
called
community
housing,
development
organizations
or
chotos
Shadows
are
just
in
one
sense:
they're
they're
a
their
particular
type
of
non-profit
defined
in
the
home
regulation
to
fund
in
the
home
rule
and
for
the
most
part,
they're
the
types
of
cdc's
that
we're
used
to
kind
of
thinking
about
right
that
they
do
housing.
M
They're
non-profits
this
that
the
other
thing
there's
a
couple
of
things
that
set
chota's
apart
and
I.
I
talk
about
those
as
the
the
rule
of
thirds.
No
more
than
one-third
of
the
board
of
a
choto
can
be
folks
that
are
public
sector
folks,
whether
those
are
elected
officials
or
folks
from
the
city
or
or
these
sorts
of
things.
M
We
want
to
make
sure
that
those
organizations
are
sufficiently
independent
of
public
sector
influence
that
they're
really
kind
of
of
by
and
for
the
people
as
it
were,
which
is
the
next
part
of
the
the
rule
of
thirds,
is
that
at
least
one-third
of
the
board
has
to
be
made
up
of
people
who
themselves
are
low
income
who
live
in
low-income
neighborhoods
and
then
there's
a
third
option
that
is
almost
never
used
and
is
is
misunderstood,
so
I
won't
even
kind
of
get
into
that
because
it's
not
really
found
appropriately
in
the
wild
most
of
the
people
that
think
they're
doing
it
are
doing
it
wrong
and
and
over
the
years
the
real
challenge
with
chotos
has
been.
M
It
has
been
twofold
one
when
you
have
those
really
kind
of
Grassroots
community-based
organizations.
It's
very
hard.
It's
often
been
hard
for
them
to
reach
a
scale
where
they
have
sufficient
Staffing
and
maintain
capacity
year
after
year
after
year,
because,
obviously
you
need
capacity
to
do
this
stuff
as
well
and
then,
on
the
other
hand,
as
groups
grow
and
get
bigger
and
more
sophisticated
and
that's
another
thing.
M
It
can
be
very
difficult,
sometimes
to
identify
a
sufficient
number
of
board
members
who
fall
into
those
either
themselves
low
income
category
or
live
in
low-income
neighborhoods.
And
so
it's
it's
been
a
little
bit
of
a
challenge,
sometimes
for
PJs
to
sort
of
maintain
a
sufficient
pool
of
of
chotos,
particularly
when
you
get
into
smaller
PJs
right.
If
you're
in
Los,
Angeles
or
Chicago
or
New
York
I
mean
you
know,
just
those
huge
major
metros,
it's
a
whole
different
issue.
M
But
when
you
get
into
you
know
smaller
PJs,
that
are,
you
know
where
they're
not
even
big
enough
to
support
one
or
two
non-profits.
Let
alone
have
some
that
are
chotos
and
some
that
aren't
in
the
study.
I
think
it's
it's
become
a
become
a
challenge
over
the
years
and
so
those
those
organizations,
those
PJs
that
have
good
show
to
Partners
to
work
with.
M
B
Gosh
that
was
really
helpful.
I
am
curious.
What
that
other
third
option
was,
but
maybe
you
could
email
us,
okay,
so
Ben
I
hope
that
was
helpful.
Sam
I
hope
that
was
helpful
was
actually
helpful
for.
F
No,
it's
just
gonna,
say:
I
came
equipped
with
the
orientation
packet
that
Santa
gave
me
and
it
had
the
the
nuts
and
bolts
but
I
had
some
follow-up
questions
about
where
that
15
came
from
or
sort
of
the
legislative
history
and
that's
exactly
what
I
was
looking
for.
So
thanks
for
being
so
thorough
and
concise
at
the
same
time,
with
a
complicated
subject.
B
B
B
That's
a
fair
response:
okay,
so
we're
gonna
I
agree.
Let's
do
that
so
we
know
we've
got
this
83
out
there.
We
know
we've
got
MHO
at
7
50.,
so
right
now
we've
got
556
347
and
we've
got
these.
Everybody
in
green
has
been
fully
funded.
It's
wonderful
and
we're
looking
at
these
large
projects,
bun
come
in
Henderson.
B
So
the
way
we
left
it
was.
We
were
curious
about
the
ldg.
We
were
curious
about.
We
were
looking
at
some
of
the
church
residences
and
we
were
wondering
about
Henderson
County's
perspective
of
where
we'd
want
the
money,
but
I'm
not
sure
how
to
really
start
this
conversation.
Does
anyone
have
any
strong
thoughts
since
the
last
meeting?
They
want
to
start
with
okay
and
then
Matt,
cable?
Well,.
O
So
it's
it's
a
little
bit
down
in
the
weeds
and
and
I
was
wondering
if
the
Buncombe
County
people
could
the
ldg
project
to
me.
Their
application
seemed
like
the
zoning
was
still
a
question
of
if
it
could
be
feasible.
Could
anyone
speak
to
that?
If
that's
a
kind
of
in
done
process
or
if
that's
still
outstanding
or
anything
like
that?
Okay.
H
Unfortunately,
this
development
isn't
in
our
jurisdiction
for
review
approvals.
My
understanding
is
it
that
it
has
received
the
necessary
zoning
approvals
from
China
Weaverville
that
they've
kind
of
overcome
that
hurdle
I,
don't
know
that
with
100
certainty,
but
that
is
my
current
understanding
in
terms
of
where
they
are
in
that
project
and
they
will
be
better
poised
to
Define.
That
I
think
you
know
part
of
the
issue
is
they
were
seeking
a
lot
of
that
approval
at
the
time
applications
were
submitted
to
both
Buncombe
County
and
to
the
Consortium.
H
B
H
So
I
think
my
question
and,
and
you
know
the
items
in
green-
we
all
felt
pretty
comfortable
with
when
we
last
met,
and
it
was
really
related
to
the
Habitat
for
Humanity
project
in
Henderson
County,
again,
not
opposed,
obviously,
to
supporting
that
project,
but
wanted
to
check
in
because
I
feel
like
there
might
have
been
some
prior
year.
Funds
for
that
project.
H
So
does
the
I
guess
it
could
be
more
of
a
question
for
Consortium
staff
because
again
it's
looking
back
in
time
which
we
love
to
do
in
the
middle
of
a
live
meeting,
but
but
also
just
kind
of
understanding.
You
know
if
funding
at
a
lower
level
would
sustain
them
in
their
activity
in
the
year.
Obviously,
that
would
have
bearing
on
Henderson
County's
perspective
on
all
of
their
projects
as
well,
but
just
to
get
some
clarification.
L
I,
don't
want
to
hold
us
up.
Let
us
do
some
research
on
that
we'll
pop
in
when
maybe
we
have
some
in
photo
share
but
and
I
may
want
to
even
check
in
with
Stephen
I
mean
I.
L
Think
what
we
had
pointed
out
when
we
were
analyzing
applications
previously,
was
that
yes,
it
is
something
to
consider
that
some
of
these,
these
style
projects,
whether
it's
down
payment
assistance
or
homeowner,
rehab
or
replacement
that
you
would
think
that
you
know
the
ability
to
fund
it
at
less
than
the
amount
just
really
changes
the
ability,
the
production
capacity
right.
L
So
it's
you
know,
the
lower
amount
would
just
indicate
a
lower
yield
of
of
units
being
able
to
to
be
developed
or
provided
down
payment
assistance,
but
we'll
check
on
that
and
be
right
back.
B
Okay,
so
we're
good
with
everything
in
the
green
I
mean
I,
guess
I
have
the
same
question:
I
mean
I
can
dive
into
what
I
think
or
does
anyone
have
a
strong
opinion
on
where
this
money
should
go?
We
know
that
one
has
another
large
ask:
okay,
you've
had
your
hand
up
a
couple
times
go
ahead.
Oh.
O
Sorry
so
I
I
don't
disagree
with
Matt
and
I
I.
Think
that
I
remember,
remember
the
in
the
TDA
material
that
they
mentioned,
that
each
of
the
homes
with
habitat
could
really
stand
as
their
own
application
sort
of
and
with
76
units
already
being
built
in
their
project
and
they're.
In
the
last
two
phases.
I
wouldn't
be
opposed
to
lowering
that
potentially
to
make
a
bigger
contribution
to
one
of
the
other
projects.
M
Yeah
and
real
quick,
let
me
just
chime
in
so
from
a
from
a
technical
standpoint:
each
house
really
kind
of
stands
alone
as
its
own
quote-unquote
home
project
and
so
yeah.
It
gives
you
some
optionality
there
in
terms
of
like,
if
I
remember,
right,
I
think
that
they're
up
to
I
think
they're,
I'm,
sorry
I'm
still
in
Mexico,
some
a
little
jumbled
but
I
think
are
they
asking
eight
houses
at
forty
thousand
or
is
it
four
houses
at
80.
M
Okay,
but
yeah
I'm,
so
basically
I
mean
it
gives
you
it
gives
you
some
optionality
to
sort
of
say:
hey
we
can't
do.
We
can't
do
this
many.
We
can
do
this.
Many
and
obviously
it
slows
down
their
overall
production.
But,
unlike
one
of
these
larger
multi-family
projects,
they
can't
you
know,
decide
to
only
build
half
of
it
here,
because
it's
really
a
series
of
individual
projects.
You've
got
some
some
optionality
from
a
funding
standpoint
to
be
able
to
to
do
it
that
way
and
say
hey.
K
Yeah
I
think
I
agree
with
with
Katie
and
Steven
there
I
mean
is
I'm
not
opposed
to
you
know,
maybe
cutting
that
giving
them.
You
know
the
opportunity
to
have
down
payment
for
four
homes,
and
then
we
reallocate
remaining
funding
to
a
project
that
can
put
more
units
into
the
marketplace.
D
J
You
it's
my
understanding
just
from
reading
the
paper.
That's
the
Maribel.
Development
has
been
approved
by
the
town
of
Weaverville,
but
they've
approved
they've
got
a
lot
going
on
lately,
so
may
be
confused
about
which
project?
That
is
the
big
positives.
For
me
on
that
project,
are
the
number
of
units
I
think
it's
the
largest
number
of
units
of
the
applications,
this
cycle,
it's
the
low
cost
per
unit
as
well?
J
To
me,
that's
a
real,
positive
and
I
like
these
discussions
and
leave
that
more
in
the
Henderson
Hendersonville
Anderson
County
discussion
about
the
habitat
reductions.
If
that
can
free
up
money
but
I'm,
a
big
fan
of
The
ldg
Proposal,
based
on
what
I'm
seeing
now.
B
B
So
we
could
fully
fund
500
000
for
ldg
is
that
I
can
see
some
of
your
faces.
Can
people
not
if
they
like
that
or
it's
hard
to
read
your
group
kind
of
feeling
here
we're
not
in
a
room
like
that
they're,
like
oh
good,
yeah,
we're
like
bobble
heads
now.
M
Let
me
look
yeah
some
of
the
there
were
some
30
units
in
the
WT
wdt
projects,
but
this
was
by
far
the
largest
number
of
30
units,
so
white
pine
Villas
had
15
at
30
and
there
were
13
at
30
in
the
Villas
at
Haywood,
but
this
one
has
39,
so
it
has
more
than
the
both
of
those
put
together.
D
N
B
Okay,
Ricky.
I
Yeah
I'd,
second,
that
I
I,
like
the
fact
that
it's
really
close
to
we
reveal
and
has
access
to
shopping
and
grocery
stores,
and
things
like
that,
especially
you're
gonna
have
somebody
that's
in
a
30
Ami
income,
they're
they're,
going
to
need
a
short
distance
to
get
day-to-day
things.
So
I
like
that,
instead
of
being
far
flung
and
being
required
to
get
either
on
a
bus,
a
long
bus
trip
or
just
disconnect
it
from
anywhere.
P
D
B
And
in
the
last
meeting
we
talked
about
this
a
little
bit
about
maybe
getting
some
geograph
geographical
information
and
data
to
look
at,
and
it
might
just
be
as
simple
as
a
regional
map
with
you
know
little
points
of
where
projects
were
and
what
year
they
were
and
how
many
units
like
just
to
get
some
context
around
you
know.
Are
we
spreading
con
projects
out?
Are
we
having
a
regional
approach?
Okay,
so
it
looks
like
we're
good
for
ldg
to
have
500
and
be
fully
funded
of
their
ask.
B
B
Yeah,
that's
really
close,
so
we
have
as
much
as
300,
000
or
216,
and
we
have
these.
We
have
the
church,
we
have
Vanderbilt
and
we
have
the
two
wdts
any
thoughts
from
the
group
on
where
they'd
like
to
park
this
money
yeah
a
little
okay
one
little
recap
I'll
share
is
that
we
thought
Vanderbilt
had
been
funded
and
will
move
forward,
but
this
would
ease
some
of
their
trying
to
Target,
lower
Amis
and
add
some
amenities
is
what
I
recall:
okay,
Matt
and
then
Kate.
H
Thank
you
so
I
didn't
want
to
also
recap:
the
Henderson
County
wdt
project
I.
Remember
us
having
a
discussion
that
they
would
still
have
a
large
funding,
Gap
based
on
the
information
that
we
had
received,
so
it
didn't
seem
quite
as
viable
as
a
of
a
project
as
the
wdt
project
in
Buncombe.
County
again,
you
know
just
for
transparency.
I
mentioned
it
at
that.
H
H
You
know
at
this
point
if
it
is
determined
that
the
county,
through
the
board,
wants
to
support
any
of
these
projects.
It's
basically
whatever
is
received
at
home,
or
lack
of
receipt
at
home
is
what
the
gap
is
generated
right.
So
we're
kind
of
balancing
I
will
mention
that
wtt's
Buncombe
County
Villas
at
Haywood
project
has
requested
the
same
amount
of
funding
from
the
county,
as
was
requested
from
home.
So
you
know
whatever
is
awarded
from
home.
The
request
will
adjust
to
what
the
county
funding
level
would
be.
H
The
you
know,
I
think
again,
it's
compelling
for
us
only
because
of
the
Gap
that
remains
at
the
choto
funding
level.
You
know
750
000,
that
perhaps
application
of
additional
funds
there
would
be
warranted
again.
Any
funding
support
to
wdt's
Buncombe
County
project
would
that
to
reduce
our
our
ask.
The
other
important
thing
about
that
project.
That
I'll
just
mention
again
is
that
they
are
seeking
tax
credit
Awards.
H
They
haven't
already
obtained
them
and
they
will
need
to
identify
their
sources
and
uses
in
order
to
be
able
to
submit
that
application
so
that
Gap
has
to
be
identified
there
is
that
is
competitive
process,
however,
so
it
is
very,
very
likely
that
they
could
have
that
project
not
succeed
in
the
award
and
then
that
funny
be
eligible
to
reallocate
so
potentially
being
able
to
go
back
into
that
Henderson
County
habitat
project
right
at
the
fall
reallocation.
H
So
we're
happy
to
see
any
funding
applied
to
any
of
these
projects,
because
we
have
some
existing
commitments
in
the
first
two.
We
don't
have
any
existing
commitment
in
Villas,
but
it's
being
requested
as
well.
So.
B
H
So
the
county
does
has,
for
the
last
several
years,
set
aside
just
over
2.3
million
in
general
fund
dollars
to
support
affordable
housing
activities,
including
construction
activities.
H
Like
all
three
projects
listed
here,
it
is
possible
that
we
could
also
apply
blind
funds,
so
it
would
either
be
you
know,
general
fund
dollars
or
bond
fund
dollars
our
process
again.
Just
for
transparency.
Applicants
seek
the
funds,
the
affordable
housing
committee
reviews
and
makes
recommendations
to
the
full
board.
The
board
makes
an
allocation
to
the
project,
so
that
is
decided
at
that
level,
but
we
do
have
applications
for
all
three
of
these
projects.
Okay,.
B
O
So
my
my
preference
still
like
last
time
with
with
the
funding
Gap
still
in
White,
Pine,
Villas
and
and
the
uncertainty
about
the
wdt
project
for
the
Villas
at
Haywood.
My
preference
would
still
be
to
put
a
portion
forward
for
the
Vanderbilt
Apartments,
because
I
do
think.
It's
really
important
to
preserve
the
the
housing
stock
that
we
do
have.
So
that's
that's
where
I'm
still
at
Robin.
D
I
know
that
I
spoke
out
against
the
Vanderbilt
project
last
time
now
that
we
have
a
little
more
money
to
allocate
and
more
money
going
to
new
units,
I
don't
feel
as
strongly
about
it
in
a
negative
way.
So
I
want
to
just
clarify
that
sure.
B
I
guess
the
question
there
is
because
we
did
have
that
sentiment
at
the
last
meeting,
which
was
okay.
This
is
great.
They
would
like
to
improve
their
facility.
We
have
existing,
affordable
housing,
we're
preserving
some
via
some
funds
out
in
Madison
and
those
kind
of
dollars,
and
do
we
want
to
focus
the
remainder
on
creation
of
new
units
and
I
thought.
That's
where
we
landed,
but
you
know
I
mean
we're
obviously
able
to
change
our
minds
for
us.
Go
ahead.
J
And
it's
a
question
on
Vanderbilt,
because
I
I
understand
the
preservation.
Kate
has
a
good
point.
There
I,
also
looking
at
Living
patterns
in
Buncombe
County
new
units
can
be
more
realistic
to
Modern
amenities.
When
you
look
at
Vanderbilt
now
and
I
just
hate
to
say
it,
but
the
amenities
within
walking
distance
are
a
Civic
Center,
some
coffee
shops
and
some
hotels
and
if
we
can,
but
what
I'll
be
mad
as
heck
if
they,
if
we
turn
the
Vanderbilt
into
another
hotel,
so
you
know
if
we
can
preserve
it.
J
B
Well
in
the
city
did
some
Asheville
City
allowed
their
we
had
to
do
something
I
didn't
realize
was
how
it
worked,
but
the
Asheville
Housing
Authority
will
be
developed,
will
be
doing
the
program
vouchers
for
this,
so
they
came
to
us
in
the
city
of
Asheville.
Council
had
to
approve
allowing
the
housing
authority
of
Asheville
to
do
a
20
million
dollar
note
for
this
renovation.
H
Sure
so,
construction
Rehabilitation,
so
you
know
upgrading
or
rehabbing
a
an
affordable
housing
development
to
preserve
it.
You
know
going
forward
in
affordable
housing
is
an
eligible
activity,
I'm,
not
sure
what
the
the
images
is
for
them.
Not
making
application
to
the
county
at
the
time
that
window
was
open.
H
B
Just
a
little
side
information
bit
Vanderbilt
was
a
hotel,
in
fact
downtown
Nashville
all
of
its
affordable
housing,
not
all
of
it,
but
most
of
it
are
in
once
Hotel
structures,
so
we've
converted
many
hotels
to
housing
that
we
have
never
converted
the
housing
back
to
a
hotel,
yet
so
any
other
thoughts
before
I
take
a
stab
at
how
we're
trying
to
do
this.
B
H
Yeah
I
would
I
would
like
to
see
you
know:
funding
applied
to
Villas
of
Haywood
again
recognizing
that
there's
a
competitive
process,
so
they're
the
potential
that
we
could
reallocate
them
to
other
non-new
unit,
creating
projects
at
a
fall
application
if
they're
unsuccessful
in
their
90
application.
Instead.
B
M
So
the
Vanderbilt
is
a
four
percent
deal.
So
it's
not
it's
not
a
nine
percent.
That's
going
to
have
to
win
the
nine
percent
award
and
if
they
came
to
the
city
council
for
that
20
million
dollar.
Note,
that's
probably
a
a
short-term
that
that's
the
the
bond
loan,
where
a
bunch
of
that
is
just
construction
only
and
and
not
going
to
be
permanent
debt
to
get
them.
The
four
percent
credits.
K
I
just
want
to
say
I
from
from
Hendersonville
and
Henderson
County
I'd
definitely
like
to
have
more
units
in
our
in
Henderson,
County
and
Hendersonville,
but
I
do
know
that
the
Gap
is
wider
for
white
pine.
So
I
would
support
the
consensus
of
the
group
whether
we
did
the
Vanderbilt
or
the
Villas.
They
seem
to
be
more
viable
projects
at
the
current
at
the
current
time.
So
say
that
so.
B
Thank
you,
I
think
this
is
when,
if
we
had
that
map
of
regional
region
objects
and
where
they
were
and
how
many
units
and
when
they
were
it,
might
help
inform
this
little
part
of
the
conversation,
but
I
agree
that
the
white
pine,
Village
Gap
was
so
large
and
I'm
hearing
that
what
we
might
want
to
do,
and
somebody
just
stick
it
in
there
216
347
at
Villas
at
Haywood,
and
then,
if
you
are
not
in
agreement
with
this
or
have
a
different
idea,
this
would
be
a
good
time
to
speak
up
or
whether
or
not
we
should
have
the
83
over
there
as
well
I
kind
of
think.
B
B
G
It
were
staff
able
to
confirm
the
the
spending
on
the
previous
Awards
to
Anderson
habitat.
G
If
I
were,
if
I
recalled,
they
had
1819
an
1819
Ward
and
a
1920
award
and
we're
making
some
progress
on
the
1819
award,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
they
have
started
the
1920
contract.
Yet
so
I
don't
know
if
if
160
is
even
something
they're
going
to
be
able
to
dig
into
this
cycle,
oh
I
I,
don't!
But
that's
why
it's
an
open
question
to.
B
L
And
staff
was
checking
on
that.
I
mean
I,
know
that
we
actually
just
met
with
Henderson
habitat
last
week
on
another
FY
1819
pull
down
of
their
DPA,
so
they
are
moving
they're
actively
working.
L
So
it's
good
to
good
to
see
that
moving
forward.
But,
yes,
we
have
another
closing,
that's
imminent
for
them,
but.
B
Well
and
I
I
hate
to
hear
that,
because
they
were
here
advocating
or
being
a
little
more
responsibly.
My
feel
more
strongly
but
I'm
kind
of
inclined
to
juice
up
Villas
at
Haywood.
More
then,
because
they
can't
spend
it
and
if
they're
not
awarded,
then
it's
back
in
the
pool.
Okay
go
ahead,
so.
O
I
personally,
I
would
not
be
in
favor
of
that
when
we're
talking
about
just
how
we're
splitting
Buncombe
I'm,
not
in
favor
of
removing
that
completely
from
Henderson.
B
L
I'll
check
right,
quick
and
I
and
right
we're
saying
that
phase
five,
which
I
think
was
relevant
to
the
1819
they're
partially
drawn,
but
we've
not
gone
into
phase
six
yet
so
so.
B
B
K
B
L
L
I
bet
it's
part
of
the
city's
contract,
perhaps
with
the
entity
but
yes,
Stephen.
Do
you
have
a.
M
M
Regular
standpoint,
it
would
be
like,
what's
in
the
contract,
the
there's
no
longer
an
expenditure
deadline
per
se
in
the
way
that
there
used
to
be,
but
all
federal
funds
excuse
me
all
appropriated,
federal
funds
expire
at
the
end
of
either
the
8th
or
the
ninth
year,
Federal
fiscal
year,
depending
on
how
long
Congress
took
to
actually
pass
a
budget.
M
So
this
year,
I
think
it's
like
the
at
as
of
September
30th
FY
15
funds
are
the
ones
that
are
like
kind
of
at
risk
of
being
rescinded,
so
Mike,
I,
I,
wouldn't
I,
wouldn't
be
worried
from
what
you're.
What
you're
saying
that
the
fun
the
prior
funds
that
that
have
been
committed
to
them
are
at
risk
of
being
lost
back
to
DC.
M
The
the
the
thing
I
would
say
here
is:
is
it's
always
harder
to
kind
of
claw
back
money,
just
the
the
small
P
politics
of
it,
and
and
that's
where,
in
a
in
a
situation
like
whether
it's
it's
Habitat
or
whether
it's
somebody
doing
homeowner,
rehab
or
or
even
tbra,
when
you
have
what's
really
kind
of
a
series
of
projects
or
an
ongoing
program,
it's
a
lot
easier
in
many
cases
to
say:
hey,
we're,
gonna
sort
of
set
aside
all
320,
but
we're
only
going
to
contract
for
160.
M
And
so
you
know
I
think
that
if
you
put
some
thought
into
it,
there's
a
way
to
kind
of
make
commitments
that
are
a
little
bit
more
incremental
in
our
performance
base,
so
that
it's
just
easier
to
say.
Well,
you
didn't
meet
the
requirements
for
the
next
installment,
so
that
doesn't
come
than
it
is
to
have
contracted
for
it
and
then
try
to
claw
it
back,
particularly
in
the
case
of
habitat.
Who
may
well
now
have
like
told
a
specific
family.
M
I
K
B
J
B
B
You
know
the
realm
of
possibility
that
they
could
have
10
closings
in
a
year,
I
mean
I,
don't
I'm
actually
not
sure
how
much
they
build.
But
if
they're
moving
forward
I
mean
it
could
go
fairly
quickly.
Matt.
H
Yeah
I
mean
I,
because
I
try
to
keep
balance
with
regional
approach
right
and
there
is
a
lot
of
support
for
Buncombe
projects.
There
are
relatively
a
lot
more
montgom
County
projects
submitted.
So
you
know
we
appreciate
the
Consortium
support.
I
would
like
to
preserve
down
payment
assistance
because
of
the
factor
that
it
is
in
Henderson
County
and
it
is
doing
homeownership
work
which
nearly
as
other
projects
are
doing,
I
think
if
we
can
preserve
some
of
it
and
and
I
I.
H
H
B
Okay,
I
think
we
got
it
so
and
thank
you
Nikki
for
adding
that
detail
after
the
20
drawdown.
If
they've
got
about
250
to
spend,
we
add
this
160
and
they're
sitting
about
400
000
and
that's
a
lot
of
homeowners.
So
that's
great,
and
you
know
if
we
step
back
and
look
because
we've
had
multiple
conversations
around
this.
This
impacts
all
the
counties
in
the
Consortium.
If
we
leave
a
good
chunk
with
Henderson
that
feels
good.
That
feels
right,
so
I'm
saying
let's
roll,
as
is
on
the
screen
forward.
B
E
I
B
B
A
P
G
B
I
believe
I
got
everyone
and
did
I
miss
you,
okay
and
Kate
I
assume
that,
because,
if
you
were
support
from
Vanderbilt,
which
I
can
appreciate.
F
C
B
We
have
voted
and
we
have
gone.
We
have
approval
if
you
want
to
throw
that
slide
back
up
for
anybody
that
might
be
listening
at
home.
This
is
what
will
move
forward
and,
as
per
our
normal
proceedings,
we
will
hear
from
the
nchfa
at
some
point
this
summer
or
fall
about
who
has
been
awarded
and
if
it
is
not
those
who
are
funded
on
this
sheet,
if
Villas
at
Haywood
is
not
funded,
then
we
will
regroup
and
reallocate
to
99
702.
D
B
It's
so
true,
Kate
I
was
actually
admiring.
How
well
you
do
your
homework?
Sometimes
you
just
have
things:
I
might
have
missed
in
all
those
applications.
It's
great.
We
appreciate
it.
I'm
sure
Vanderbilt
appreciates
the
support
too.
We
do
all
love
Vanderbilt
we're
thrilled
to
have
it
in
our
downtown
okay.
B
This
was
the
only
item
on
our
agenda
today.
I'm,
not
sure
if
we
have
any
public
comment.
M
Know
if
I
could
for
what
it's
worth
but-
and
you
never
know
it's
a
it's
a
little
bit
of
a
black
box,
but
NCR
is
probably
more
likely
to
be
able
to
pull
this
off
absent
that
funding
than
any
of
these
other
deals.
They're
they're
a
big
group.
They
know
what
they're
doing
the
percentage
of
funding
in
that
and
if
it's
got
section
eight
there's
a
there's,
a
really
darn
good
chance.
That
goes
either
way,
not
to
say
that
it,
you
know.
Obviously
always
more.
M
Money
is
always
better
from
the
developer's
standpoint,
but
you
know:
don't
don't
and
I
love
preservation,
myself
too,
but
don't
don't
don't
despair.
You
know
if
nothing
else,
they'll
have
another
bite
of
the
Apple,
but
there's
a
good
chance
that
they're
able
to
to
pull
this
off.
If
we
as
long
as
the
banking
crisis
doesn't
mess
everything
else
up.
B
The
banking
crisis-
yeah,
okay,
I,
didn't
hear
Athena
or
someone
from
snap
did.
We
have
any
callers.
A
B
Don't
have
any
callers,
sorry,
that's:
okay,
you're,
watching
and
recording
okay,
everyone!
Well!
That
was
the
only
item
on
our
agenda
and
I
sure
appreciate
everybody
taking
the
time
for
a
second
meeting
to
do
this
to
the
best
that
we
can
I
feel
like.
We
have
a
really
good
allocation
plan.
Here
we
put
a
lot
of
thought
into
it.
I
appreciate
everybody's
time
and
energy
and
really
just
kind
of
deepen
digging
deep
into
this.
To
make
sure
we
can
get
the
best
housing
for
our
region.
It
feels
really
good.
B
This
year
a
nice
spread,
Sam,
I,
hope
you've
been
able
to
acclimate,
and
hopefully
we'll
see
you
next
time.
Instead
of
Ben
and
Ben,
we'll
have
one
less
thing
on
his
plate,
which
I
sure
like
okay,.
B
A
Sage,
it's
actually
Christina.
We
did
not
receive
phone
calls,
but
we
do
have
two
written
comments
from
Stephen
Drake
with
wdt.
We
have
the
Villas
at
swananua.
I
can
provide
that
to
you
all
in
written
format
or,
however,
you
would
like.
B
But
just
go
ahead
and
just
email
it
to
us,
because
we
I
want
to
keep
people
to
their
time
and
it's
11
o'clock,
and
that
was
our
scheduled
time.
Okay,
thank
you.
Okay,
so
we'll
get
that
in
the
email,
since
it
was
already
final
I'm
curious.
If
I
hope
it
doesn't
change
any
of
our
opinions
all
right.
Thank
you.
Everyone
I
hope
you
have
a
terrific
rest
of
your
day
and
I'm,
not
sure
when
our
next
meeting
is
now
so
we'll
have
it
in
your
inbox
soon,
thanks
everyone,
we.