►
From YouTube: Housing & Community Development
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Good
morning,
everyone
I'm
chair,
Sage,
Turner
and
I'd
like
to
welcome
you
to
the
November
15th,
Housing
and
Community
Development
committee
meeting.
All
council
members
and
staff
are
participating
virtually
for
those
of
you
out
there
with
us
today
welcome
to
help
our
audience
follow
along
I'll
State,
each
section
of
the
agenda
out
loud.
We
are
streaming
live
on
our
virtual
engagement
Hub,
which
is
accessible
through
the
virtual
engagement
Hub
link
on
the
front
page
of
the
city's
website.
We
also
have
an
option
for
the
public
to
listen
live.
You
can
do
that
by
calling.
B
855-925-2801
you'll
be
prompted
for
a
meeting
code
and
that
code
is
9791
for
today's
meeting.
We
also
have
the
option
to
call
in
and
comment
live
during
the
meeting.
That
process
is
similar,
you'll
call
the
number
855-925-2801
again
meeting
code,
9791
you'll
be
muted
and
you'll,
hear
the
meeting
running
live
and
at
this
point,
you'll
hear
for
more
options:
press
star,
3.,
so
press
star
3
will
allow
callers
to
continue
to
listen,
live
and
join
a
speaker
queue
and
each
speaker
will
have
three
minutes
to
speak
as
a
general
reminder.
B
If
everyone
could
stay
on
mute
unless
speaking
and
if
you
can
raise
your
hand
virtually
or
physically
I'll,
see
you
and
we'll
make
sure
to
queue
up
all
your
questions
and
also
please
refrain
from
using
the
chat
function.
Not
everyone
can
access
all
right.
I
will
now
go
through
and
introduce
all
committee
members
and
staff
who
are
participating
with
us
virtually
today.
Council
list
app
is
our
name,
please
say:
quick,
hello,
newly
re-elected
vice
mayor
Shanika,
Smith
good
morning
and
also
elected
councilwoman
Antonette
Mosley
good
morning.
Congratulations
to
you!
B
B
A
B
B
We'll
do
a
roll
call,
though
vice
mayor
Smith,
aye,
councilwoman,
Mosley,
aye,
Sage,
Turner,
myself,
I
right
great!
Thank
you.
The
minutes
are
approved,
we're
moving
on
to
item
number
two,
which
is
cdbg
and
home
reallocation.
We
have
a
presentation
and
discussion
with
staff
and
Jonathan
Jones
will
be
presenting
go
ahead.
Jonathan.
F
So
this
morning's
update
on
the
cbbg
and
home
program
comes
as
we've
not
presented
to
the
committee
in
a
little
while,
but
wanted
to
give
you
all
a
heads
up
on
the
next
couple
of
months
as
we
enter
into
the
next
funding
cycle
for
these
very
important
Community
funds
cover
a
couple
of
key
takeaways
from
the
discussion
this
morning
wanted
to
remind
everyone
that
the
cdbg
and
home
program
Community
Development,
plot
Grant
and
home
investment
partnership
program,
their
federal
funds.
F
This
year,
we're
anticipating
approximately
1.3
million
dollars
available
for
from
the
cdbg
program
and
in
approximately
2.3
million
from
the
home
program
we'll
get
into
some
of
the
breakdowns
of
that.
But
staff
is
preparing
the
application
process
getting
ready
to
publish
that
to
community
so
that
eligible
applicants
can
begin
applying
for
those
funds
as
part
of
next
year's
action
plan
that
would
begin
July,
1.
F
so
again,
cdbg
is
the
Community
Development
block
grant
program.
We
usually
receive
a
little
over
a
million
dollars
for
that
program.
The
primary
purpose
of
the
cdbt
program
is
to
benefit
low
and
moderate
income,
individuals
and
households
within
the
city
of
Asheville,
the
home
program,
which
is
often
paired,
and
our
community
development
team
manages
both
those
programs.
The
purpose
of
that
is
to
help
make
affordable
housing
more
accessible
and
available
in
a
Four
County
region
of
Madison,
Transylvania,
Henderson
and
Buncombe
County
and
the
home
program.
F
Is
those
funding
recommendations
go
through
the
Asheville
Regional
Housing
Consortium,
in
the
same
way
that
CVG
is
reviewed
and
approved
through
hcd.
F
F
Public
services
for
low
and
modern,
moderate
income
clientele,
so
those
are
capped
at
15
of
our
annual
allocation
are
very
competitive
every
year,
meaning
that
we,
we
usually
end
up
with
about
150,
000
or
so
available
to
a
number
of
very
important
Community
programs,
so
that
I
don't
envy
the
decisions
that
this
committee
makes
but
glad
that
we've
got
that
resource
available,
as
well
as
the
planning
Administration
funds
that
the
city
uses
to
fund
operations
here
of
the
community
development
team.
To
help
keep
these
programs
track
report
to
HUD
maintain
monitoring.
F
When
we
come
to
the
application
cycle,
it's
important
to
point
out
that
there
are
a
number
of
eligible
organizations
that
can
apply
so
local
nonprofits.
The
city
as
a
local
government
can
also
apply
and
administer
programs
directly.
Although
that's
not
been
something
that
we've
done
a
lot
of
in
the
past
and
then
specifically
for
home,
we
have
Community
Development
housing
organizations
and
housing
developers
that
are
helping
get
units
on
the
ground
using
those
home
funds
come
on
so
just
to
take
a
look
at
the
cdbt
programs
that
were
funded
for
the
current
program
year.
F
So
that
is
starting
July
1
of
2022
and
going
through
June
30th,
so
2023.
So
we
are
in
that
in
that
current
CBD
program
year,
including
just
give
you
an
idea,
a
reminder
of
the
programs
that
were
funded.
We
are
the
community
development
team
is
in
the
process
of
working
through
contracts
and
getting
first
draw
requests,
process
and
payments
out
to
those
Partners.
F
We
have
gotten
plenty
of
good
feedback
from
those
funded
Partners
about
the
pre-award
costs
that
we
were
able
to
implement
this
year,
allowing
them
to
begin
their
contracts
and
begin
drawing
funds
earlier
in
the
year.
We
would
typically
be
held
back
by
the
contract
that
the
city
has
with
HUD
and
making
sure
that's
executed,
but
because
of
the
decisions
made
last
year,
we've
been
able
to
move
forward
with
those
contracts
a
little
quicker.
This
time.
F
For
the
upcoming
year,
we
are
basing
the
estimated
funding
on
last
year's
program.
Hud
has
not
yet
published
our
allocations,
so
at
the
top
of
the
chart
on
our
estimated
funding,
you'll
see
that
there's
a
little
over
a
million
dollars
available,
we're
anticipating
a
little
more
than
a
million
dollars,
would
come
again
from
the
cdbt
program
and
we
conservatively
estimate
about
75
000
that
would
come
back
in
program,
income
from
loan
repayments
or
any
other
fees
that
come
in
from
some
of
our
programs.
F
We
also
have
some
additional
program
funding
that
has
been
returned.
A
couple
of
different
programs
have
reached
out
to
City
staff.
Let
us
know
that
their
projects
weren't
going
to
be
completed
as
intended,
or
that
they
had
found
other
sources
better
fit
for
their
program,
and
so
some
of
those
funds
have
been
returned.
F
We
submitted
our
action
plan
for
this
year
so
that
eleven
thousand
dollars
still
needs
to
be
reallocated
and
we
are
estimating
a
little
over
150
000
in
Old
City
administrative
funds
that,
from
previous
years,
offsets
from
staff
costs
from
staff
turnover,
yeah,
so
excess
program,
income
old-time
balances
that
we
just
want
to
go
ahead
and
recycle
those
funds
from
administrative
costs
back
into
Community
programs,
giving
us
a
little
over
238
thousand
dollars
that
we
can
reallocate
as
part
of
this
application
cycle,
because
we
have
already
used
the
cdbt
funding
limits
for
administrative
and
public
service
funds.
F
So
administrative
funding
is
capped
each
year
at
20
percent
of
our
annual
allocation
and
our
public
services
are
capped
at
15
of
our
annual
allocation.
We
would
need
to
redeploy,
recycle
these
old
funds
into
non-public
service
and
non-administrative
activities,
so
that
would
be
affordable,
housing,
Economic,
Development
or
public
facilities
and
infrastructure
similar
to
the
Siegen
sleep
project,
and
so
that
that
would
be
where
we
would
need
to
redirect
those
funds.
This
year,
foreign.
F
Looking
at
our
timeline,
we
are
planning
to
publish
consistent
with
previous
years
the
application
for
both
cdbg
and
Home
in
mid-December,
giving
our
applicants
a
little
more
than
a
month
to
return
those
applicants
would
be
able
to
reach
out
to
City
staff
and
last
year,
I
think
we
did.
We
made
a
shift
in
how
we
were
Fielding
those
questions,
so
that
we
can
make
sure
that
we
were
answering
those
to
all
applicants
and
letting
everyone
know.
F
You
know
through
a
frequently
asked
questions
processed
any
of
the
any
of
the
information
that
they
would
need
to
help
make
their
applications
better
or
clarify
any
questions
they
had
again.
We
would
hope
to
set
up
a
specific
presentation,
meeting,
I
think
separating
those
presentations
from
the
funding
meetings
worked
well
in
the
Pat
in
last
year,
so
we
would
recommend
doing
that
again
and
having
a
mid-march
application
presentation
session,
followed
by
a
funding
recommendation
meeting
at
the
end
of
March.
F
These
timelines
would
allow
us
to
go
through
the
30-day
public
comment
period.
That's
required
for
submitting
our
annual
action
plan
to
HUD
receiving
councils
approval
and
then
making
that
submission
to
our
local
HUD
field
office
before
the
May
15th
deadline.
So
the
cycle,
the
timing
of
that,
would
be
consistent
with
previous
years
and
would
allow
us
to
meet
our
deadlines
and
obligations.
F
So
again,
the
key
takeaways
being
we're
trying
to
manage
these
funds.
Well,
we
are
expecting
somewhere
in
the
neighborhood
of
1.3
million
for
the
cdbt
program
that
this
committee
would
make
funding
recommendations
for,
and
we
are
planning
to
publish
that
application
in
mid-December
for
our
partners.
That
information
will
go
out
to
our
community
development
list
serve
and
we
would
put
a
notice
on
the
city's
website
making
sure
that
eligible
applicants
know
that
that's
available
and
with
that
be
glad
to
take
any
questions.
F
So
in
previous
years,
the
city
would
not
be
able
to
go
to
contract
with
our
partners
with
our
with
our
grantees,
until
we
had
received
our
funding
contract
from
HUD
and
executed.
That
document
and
given
the
delays
at
the
federal
level,
sometimes
that's
been
as
early
as
August
and
as
late
as
March,
but
the
pre-award
costs
allows
the
city
to
go
to
contract
with
our
grantees
and
reimburse
them
for
up
to
25
of
their
program
costs
through
the
reimbursement
process.
F
Before
we
did
that
final
contract
for
HUD,
once
we
get
that
final
contract
from
HUD,
we
would
then
be
able
to
continue
paying
the
other
eligible
expenses
through
the
draw
request
process
for
the
rest
of
the
year.
But
what
it
gives
us
is
sort
of
that
that
leg
up
in
in
the
timing
of
doing
reimbursements.
B
Councilwoman
Leslie
anything
so
the
outrage
is
the
list
serve
and
our
website
and
the
list
serve
as
something
that
we
just
kind
of
started
in
recent
years.
So
I
mean
we
always
have
enough
applicants
that
seems
like
but
I
wonder.
If
there's
anything
more,
we
could
be
doing
to
get
the
word
out
there
about
this
important
funding.
You
know,
that's
just
a
limited
I,
don't
know,
I'm
surprised,
that's
all
we
do,
but
I'm
not
sure.
If
that
I
have
a
suggestion,
that's
better
to.
F
B
B
C
Thank
you,
chair
Turner,
yes,
so
this
is
just
a
for
feedback
and
discussion
for
you
all.
Initially,
we
were
trying
to
get
decisions
made
at
this
meeting,
but
it
became
quickly
Apparent
at
the
ahac
meeting,
affordable
housing
advisory
committee.
That.
C
When
you
live
in
this
world
every
day,
it
doesn't
seem
like
there's
huge
changes,
but
it
can
be
a
lot
to
digest
for
other
folks,
so
we're
here
for
your
feedback
and
discussion.
Next
Katie,
we,
you
know
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
was
established
in
2000,
so
it's
been
around
for
about
22
years.
C
Currently
we
have
with
the
last
transfer
from
the
remaining
bond
fund.
We
have
about
7.65
million
as
an
available
fund
balance,
so
this
seems
like
a
good
time
to
make
sure
with
all
the
changes
in
the
market
and
our
construction
markets
seemed
like
a
good
time
to
look
at
just
a
few
pieces
of
the
policy
before
we
open
up
for
a
cycle.
So
that's
partly
why
we're
proposing
these
changes.
We
also
want
to
further
align
with
the
nchfa
Housing
Finance
Agency
requirements.
C
That's
the
agency
for
anyone
who
doesn't
know
that
approves
tax
credit
projects,
so
some
of
our
bigger
projects
that
are
applying
to
them
for
tax
credits
also
applying
to
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
and
even
to
the
home
funds.
C
And
so
when
we
have
very
different
criteria.
It
makes
it
clunky
a
clunky
process
for
applicants,
and
we
also
wanted
to
just
adjust
scoring
criteria
to
make
sure
we're
in
line
with
Community
priorities.
C
Furthermore,
we're
also
trying
to
align
our
funding
process
with
Buncombe
County's,
because
we
find
we're
finding
a
lot
of
applicants
applying
to
both
city
and
county
for
funds
and
there's
some
other
considerations
that
have
been
brought
up
in
the
past
couple
months
that
we'll
be
bringing
forward
in
the
spring.
Next.
C
C
So,
just
a
little
background
again
that
the
fund
was
started
in
June
2000
by
city
council,
it
had
previously
been
annual
cycle,
but
it
evolved
over
time
to
become
a
rolling
basis
application
and
through
the
budget
process,
how
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
has
been
funded
traditionally
through
about
a
half
a
million
dollars.
C
Every
year
comes
from
the
general
fund
as
a
part
of
the
City
Council
budget,
five
million
dollars
came
from
the
original
House,
affordable
housing
bonds
and
we've
gone
over
that
several
times
in
this
committee
and
they
were
used
from
2017
to
2021
and
then
I
figures.
At
your
last
meeting,
you
approved
city
council
approved
the
transfer
of
six
million
additional
from
the
affordable
housing
bonds.
C
So
looking
back
at
the
history
of
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
between
2001
and
2019,
that
hasn't
trust
fund
loaned
approximately
15
million
and
produced
about
1300,
affordable
units
so,
and
that
does
not.
That
is
not
counting
the
recent
allocations
that
you
all
have
made
like
Laurelwood
apartments
or
MHO
things
like
that.
Next.
C
So
currently,
some
of
the
eligible
uses
of
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
are
construction
of
new
housing
for
sale,
rent
land
acquisition,
hard
costs,
conversion
or
adaptive,
reuse
to
existing
non-residential
structures
for
housing,
purchase
and
Rehab
of
existing
substandard
multi-family
housing
units
and
purchase
and
rehab
or
conversion
of
market
rate
multi-family
units
and
manufactured
housing
and
modular
construction
and
then
down
payment
assistance
loans,
as
long
as
funds
are
not
forgiven
is
the
current
in
the
policy
today.
Next.
C
C
Affordable
units
have
been
pledged
to
the
city
in
exchange
for
density
bonus
or
with
conditional
zonings
aren't
eligible
for
Housing
Trust
Fund,
that's
in
the
current
policy,
Rehabilitation
of
single-family
homes
and
duplexes,
and
projects
must
be
located
within
the
city
that
we
would
never
want
to
change
that
league
for
legal
reasons
and
pre-development
expenses
are
not
an
eligible
use
and
so
I
think
the
next
slide
has
questions.
Are
there
any
questions
about
any
of
that?
At
this
point,.
B
C
Did
not
highlight
this,
we
are
suggesting
that
you
know
for
a
tax
credit
project.
That's
a
hundred
percent,
affordable,
I.
Think
we're
going
to
be
seeing
this
where
they
go
through
their
process.
They
get
their
CZ
because
they
have
to
get
their
zoning
entitlement
before
they
apply
for
tax
credits.
They
get
their
tax
credits
and
then
maybe
the
funding
formula
changes,
or
maybe
they
go
from
a
nine
percent
tax
credit
project
to
four
percent
project
and
then
all
of
a
sudden
they
have
a
gap.
C
I
think
it's
reasonable
for
them
to
be
able
to
come
back
and
ask
city
council
for
funding
other
cities.
Do
that
and
I
think
that,
so
that
will
be
a
change
that
we
would
recommend
to
the
city
council
for
100,
affordable
projects.
They
can't
do
anything
more
right
like
so
we've
seen
projects
that
do
20
percent.
C
B
B
It's
just
interesting.
All
these
uses
that
we
allow
that
maybe
haven't
been
used
right
might
be
worth
more
discussion.
I
have
a
couple
questions,
but
let's
hear
from
other
councilwoman
well
it's
fresh
on
the
brain,
others
any
questions
or
comments.
A
B
And
I
know
it
sounded
like
this
is
kind
of
a
first
glance.
More
things
might
be
coming
in
the
future
months
and
sound
like
a
hack.
Had
some
pushback
a
little
Janna
set
go
ahead.
A
Yes,
I
was
I,
had
the
same
question
about
the
policy,
the
conditional
zonings
and
Housing
Trust
Fund,
and
we
might
want
to
look
at
that
more
closely.
I,
don't
think
I
was
aware
of
it,
but
I
can
think
of
several
instances
where
at
least
when
they
were
brought
all
at
the
same
time.
So
a
Housing
Trust
fund
request
at
the
same
time
as
a
conditional
zoning
that
it
has
been
approved
and
maybe
the
way
that
it
was
originally
written
was
sort
of
that
intent
that
you
don't
somebody
doesn't
say.
A
A
B
At
the
last
time
that
was
on
the
table
for
a
minute,
Janice
you're,
not
remembering
incorrectly
but
I,
think
they
decided
in
the
end
not
to
Okay.
So
a
couple
questions
for
me,
the
10,
so
we
I
love
that
we're
Marion
County
policy,
I
love
the
timing,
all
of
those
great
things
of
everything
aligning
the
10.
Do
we
know
if
the
county
just
kind
of
randomly
grabbed
that
number
I
know
they
had
hired
a
firm
to
do
a
study
themselves.
Did
that
10
come
from
the
examples
they
looked
at?
Do
we
know
I.
B
C
So
this
is
just
a
quick
slide
on
why
we're
suggesting
policy
revisions.
Now
you
know.
Currently,
we
have
some
caps
in
place.
Some
one
million
dollar
ask
cap
and
20
000
per
sub
per
unit
subsidy
cap,
which
we
are
not.
We
have
not
been
Heating
and
it's
just
not
really
realistic
in
our
current
market.
We
also
wanted
to
add
some
additional
underwriting
criteria
to
help
us
evaluate
projects
and
again
nchfa
requirements
aligning
with
those
and
with
the
county
next
so
similar
to
what
you
just
heard
from
Jonathan.
C
We
are
proposing
a
schedule
for
the
Housing
Trust
Fund,
and
this
is
really
not
literally
a
part
of
the
policy,
but
it's
just
so.
You
understand
the
flow
of
how
this
would
work,
and
this
is
how
it
would
be
more
aligned
with
Buncombe
County
December.
We
would
have
a
call
for
applications
after
Council
approves
the
policy
February
an
application
deadline.
C
March
have
an
initial
review
by
this
committee
in
the
April,
have
final
recommendations
from
this
committee
and
then
take
those
final
decisions
to
Council
in
April,
which
allows
applicants
who
are
applying
for
tax
credits
to
be
kind
of
ready
for
their
I.
Think
they're,
usually
like
the
second
Friday
in
May,
is
the
tax
credit
deadline.
C
C
So
now
we'll
get
into
the
meat
thing,
so
we're
trying
to
highlight
the
big
the
big
policy
changes
here.
So
we
are
recommending
removing
the
one
million
dollar
cap
on
requests
and
instead
use
10
of
total
estimated
project
costs,
we're
basing
that
on
recent
applications,
seven
out
of
the
last
11
applications
that
city
council
approved
were
over
a
million
dollars.
So
clearly
the
million
dollar
cap
is
not
working
for
folks.
C
Buncombe
County
uses
a
10
percent
standard
for
non
four
percent
tax
credit
projects,
meaning
if
you're
a
four
percent
tax
credit
project,
they
favor
those
and
you
can
actually
apply
for
up
to
20
percent
now,
for
so
for
just
an
example
to
understand
how
this
works
for
Laurelwood
Apartments,
which
was
at
City
Council
in
August,
that
was
1.5
million
and
it
equaled
6.6
percent
of
the
total
project
costs.
C
So
I
was
speaking
with
one
of
our
build
local,
affordable
housing
developers
and
they
said
well,
you
know,
Buncombe
County
goes
up
to
20
I
said
well.
If
we
went
up
to
20,
which
of
course
Council
can
do
you
know
you
can
Council
can
always
decide.
You
know
this
project
merits
going
above
and
beyond,
and
that's
fine,
but
20
percent
of
a
really
large
project
is
gonna
like
basically
wipe
out
our
whole
budget
right
like
so
one
project
is
going
to
take
the
whole
or
half
of
the
pot
of
money.
C
So
then
we're
not
really
spreading
the
money
at
all
in
any
way.
So
I
think
10
is
a
reasonable
number.
So
if
6.6
for
Laurel
6.6
for
Laurelwood
was
1.5,
you
know
10
percent
would
have
been.
C
You
know,
probably
over
2
million
right,
so
I
think
where
we
are
where
we
want
to
be
now
at
some
point
there
may
be
a
scenario
where
the
city
says:
Hey
County
will
fund
this
project
more
and
if
you
fund
that
project
more
or
you
know
there
may
be
some
things
like
that,
where
the
two
elected
bodies
want
to
do
something
different.
That's
you
know
an
unknown
at
this
point,
but
we
are
seeing
you
know
folks,
coming
to
both
bodies
asking
for
for
money.
C
Similarly,
with
the
subset
per
unit
subsidy
cap,
it's
at
twenty
thousand
dollars
per
unit
and
and
that
can
work
for
some
projects,
I
think
the
Laurelwood
example.
It
was
at
around
27,
000
or
close
to
28
000
per
unit,
but
I'm
not
sure
the
cap
makes
sense
anymore
with
our
current
market
and
thought
is.
It
was
already
in
the
scoring
rubric
and
just
kind
of
maybe
beefing
up
or
not
beefing
up,
but
tweaking
the
scoring
piece
of
that
so
that
you
are
considering
it.
C
You
are
looking
at
it,
but
it's
not
like
a
hard
cut
off
and
then
you
know,
depending
on
the
project,
the
per
unit
subsidy
can
be
very
different.
You
know
some
developers
are
not
applying
for
tax
credits
and
they're,
just
asking
for
Housing
Trust
Fund
and
maybe
a
luige.
Some
are
using
tax
credits.
Some
are
using
other
sources
of
funding.
So
there's
all
you
know
it's
hard
to
make
one-size-fits
all
in
these
requirements.
C
C
Income
averaging
is
something
that
the
Housing
Finance
Agency
allows.
So
basically
you
know
for
a
tax
credit
project
where
generally
it's
understood
at
60,
Ami
and
Below,
they
allow
you
to
go
some
over
eight
up
to
80.
But
then
you
get
some
units
that
are
at
30.
So
it's
a
way
to
really
get
some
much
lower
income
units.
So
it's
a
way
for
us
to
diversify
the
incomes
and
help
developers
reach
some
of
those
lower
incomes,
which
I
think
is
a
good
thing.
C
So
we
are
wanting
to
add
that
to
our
policy
and
then
the
scoring
criteria,
adding
some
pieces
and
we'll
go
over
this
in
detail
in
the
future
slide
so
again
per
unit
subsidy
amounts,
housing,
Choice
vouchers
and
then,
lastly,
as
I
said
before,
just
adding
some
additional
underwriting
criteria,
like
vacancy
rates,
debt
coverage
ratio
trying
to
update
those
to
be
more
in
line
with
other
agencies,
we
were
having
people
use
a
five
percent
vacancy
rate
for
the
city,
but
nchfa
requires
a
seven
percent
vacancy
rate.
C
C
You
know
you
can
go
all
out
and
change
all
the
things
we're
really
just
trying
to
update
a
few
items
in
this,
and
so
this
is
what
we
were
suggesting.
You
know
the
way
it
was
is
if
you
had
10
10,
000,
subsidy
or
less
per
unit,
you
got
15
points
and
so
I
just
I
kind
of
update,
or
we
updated
these
to
you
know
20,
000
or
less.
You
get
a
good
number
of
points,
but
you're
still
getting
points
up
to
30
000..
C
E
One
thing
that
continues
to
pitch
my
attention
is:
when
we
use
the
language
of
accepting
housing,
Choice
vouchers
I
would
love
to
see
us
move
towards
the
place
where
developers
are
saying
they
will
set
aside
a
certain
number
for
Housing,
Choice
vouchers
or
vouchers
of
any
kind.
Much
like
MHL
agreed
to
do
with
their
restaurant
Court
project
for
Foster
children,
I'm
wondering
Janice.
If
that's
legally
permissible.
A
Yes,
I
think
it's
legally
permissible,
because
these
are
our
housing
trust
funds,
and
so
we
can
set
the
policy
around
that
and
I
think
it's
a
good.
It's
a
good
distinction,
because
so
technically
and
maybe
Sasha
will
talk
about
this-
we've
talked
about
non-discrimination,
language
and
our
Housing
Trust
Fund
policy
says
you
will
not
discriminate
and
what
that
really
means
is
like.
Source
of
income
is
one
of
those.
A
So
all
everybody
with
a
Housing
Trust
Fund
should
actually
be
accepting
housing,
Choice
vouchers
if
they're
eligible
to
live
in
the
development-
and
we
have
started
to
add
that
language,
because
it's
already
in
the
policy
we
make
sure
to
add
it
into
our
Housing
Trust
Fund
agreements.
It's
just
that
basic
you
won't
discriminate
at
all
and-
and
it
mentions
on
source
of
income
and
also.
B
And
councilwoman
Mosley
can
I.
Ask
a
question.
Is
the
background
on
this
because
when
we
say
accepting-
and
maybe
this
is
more
of
a
stat
question-
are
we
are
there
situations
where
we
have
this
requirement
in
place
and
this
acceptance
language
but
they're
not
doing
it
because
they
couldn't
find
tenants
or.
E
Or
if
I
don't
know
of
any
particular
instances
but
I
do
know
the
importance
of
precise
language
from
a
legal
standpoint
right,
accepting
and
set
aside
are
two
different
I,
don't
know
if
that
means,
if
two
people
come
up
at
the
same
time
and
there's
one
unit
available
and
someone
has
a
housing,
Choice
voucher
and
the
other
doesn't.
B
C
E
C
Specifically,
I
think
some
of
the
ideas
around
Sight
Readiness
or
pre-development
activities
or
land
acquisition
in
particular
areas.
We
are
planning
to
come
back
to
you
in
next
year
spring
with
some
additional
policy.
Okay,.
E
E
My
help
was
that
we
would
begin
to
look
at
instances
where
folks
are
coming
to
us
for
Luigi
or
Housing
Trust
Fund
in
those
areas,
and
my
hope
and
goal
was
that
we
would
in
a
sense
increase
the
requirements
for
developing
in
those
areas,
but
also
increase
the
points
for
developing
in
those
areas.
An
idea
that
came
to
mind
and
I
can't
remember.
E
There
was
one
kind
of
downtown
really
close
to
south
side,
and
there
was
a
bit
of
consternation
about
the
Ami
there
I'm
wondering
if,
if
in
instances
such
as
that,
we
could
look
into
having
a
policy
that
requires
a
lower
than
usual
and
by
usual
I
mean
our
80
percent
in
those
areas
and
also
a
requirement
of
housing,
Choice
vouchers,
and
if
we're
feeling
really
digging
something
that
says
and
a
requirement
that
folks
affected
by
herbal
renewal
also
be
included
as
residents
name
it
for
the
moon.
Just
the
thought
shoot.
B
F
B
B
A
F
A
Area
I
think
that
that
seems
to
connect
and
make
sense
that
you
could
do
a
targeting
to
lower
it's
probably
going
to
mean
more
of
a
subsidy
needed,
but
for
the
shooting
of
the
Moon
councilwoman
Mosley
I
think
it
would
be
difficult
to
say
and
set
aside
for
somebody
affected
by
urban
renewal,
but
we
can
work
on
that
only
because
that's
hard
to
Define
with
it's
all
in
the
definitions.
As
you
were
saying,
the
language.
B
C
Next
Katie,
so
ahac
looked
at
these
the
redlined
policy
on
November
3rd
and
they
had
some
concerns
and
wanted
to
bring
those
to
you
and
for
any.
If
that
helps
or
help
sir
feeds
your
discussion,
there
was
concern.
If
we
went
to
an
annual
funding
cycle
for
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
that
it
would
limit
flexibility
for
smaller
developers.
C
We
can.
We
are
exploring
a
second
opportunity
later
in
the
year
for
smaller
projects
and
I'm,
not
sure
what
that
threshold
would
be
and
like
I
said,
and
that
may
also
be
Charlotte
does
something
where
they
they
have
an
annual
cycle.
But
then
later
in
the
year,
they
have
an
opportunity.
If
you
got
approved
in
the
first
cycle
like
if,
like
for
tax
credit
developers
and
things
change,
you
can
come
back
that.
So
there
might
be
a
couple
different
reasons
to
do.
A
second
round.
C
I,
guess
is
what
I'm
saying
they
were
also
concerned
that
the
scoring
rubric
favors
larger
projects-
and
that
is
true-
it
does
favor
larger
projects
to
maximize
the
number
of
units
that
are
produced
from
the
Housing
Trust
Fund,
but
it
doesn't
prevent
city
council
from
funding
smaller
scale,
affordable
projects.
You
know
the
the
scoring
I,
don't
think
is
intended
to
be
the
absolute
decision
maker
for
city
council.
C
It
informs
your
decision
right
and
Janice
and
I
have
been
having
long-running
discussions
about
legal
limits
of
you,
know,
area
median
income
and
affordability
and
how
what
we
can
fund
and
what
we
can't
and
I
was
just
absolutely
sure
incorrectly,
that
we
were
limited
to
80
for
home
ownership,
and
that
was
not
true,
so
I.
Unfortunately,
I
gave
bad
information
to
ahac
and
I've
clarified
that
with
them.
C
So
the
policy
as
it
stands
is,
you
know
legally
defensible
and
it's
okay,
where
it
is
so
what
our
policy
is
right
now
is
80
and
below
for
rental
projects
and
100
Ami
and
below
for
homeownership.
B
C
C
So
again,
this
is
the
same
slide
we
saw
before.
So
these
are
the
things
we're
looking
for
feedback
from
you
on
and,
of
course,
anything
additional
you
wanna
give
to
us.
I
thought
we
had
one
more
slide:
Katie
was
there
one
more
yeah
I
think
the
order
got
switched
here
so
ahac
also
was
interested
or
some
some
of
the
members
of
ahac
were
interested
in
having
a
more
defined
role
in
the
approval
process.
C
Some
of
them
wanted
to
actually
vote
on
applications
before
they
came
to
you.
Some
members
were
okay
with
just
giving
comment
on
applications
and
I
think
some
were
undecided.
C
Their
current
bylaws
basically
say
that
they
are
advising
Counsel
on
funding
priorities
and
I.
Take
that
to
mean,
like
you
know,
rental
is
a
you
know.
Rental
at
this
Ami
is
a
priority,
or
this
is
a
priority
or
that's
a
priority,
not
specific
funding
applications.
So
if
Council
wanted
ahac
to
have
a
specific
role
in
this
process
that
we
would
look
to
you
all
for
that
direction,.
C
So
next,
and
just
as
a
note
so
here's
our
schedule
of
policy
review
we'll
be
going
back
to
ahac
December
one
they're
having
a
retreat
and
so
we'll
have
a
chance
to
be
able
to
dig
into
anything
else
that
feedback
from
hcd
any
additional
information
from
staff.
And
then
we
will
bring
that
back
to
you
I
believe
on
December
6th
ahead
of
a
council
meeting
on
December
13th
next.
C
So
yes,
so
you
all!
This
is
back
to
what
I
was
saying
earlier.
You
all
had
some
other
policy
considerations.
You
wanted
to
look
at,
including
down
payment
assistance,
site,
Readiness
and
some
land
acquisition
criteria,
and
we
could
bring
these
back
in
summer
spring
and
summer
of
23.
C
Next,
and
so
those
are
just
our
key
takeaways
that
we
started
with
but
happy
to
hear
your
feedback
on
any
of
that
I
know
it
was
a
lot
so.
B
C
B
It's
interesting
because
we
are
ignoring
the
cap
so
often
and
I
hope
that
we
don't
in
state
new
policy
and
then
ignore
it
as
well.
You
know
what
I
mean
I'm,
hoping
we
just
try,
and
you
know
we
come
to
a
consensus
as
a
group
that
you
know
we're
setting
policy.
This
is
why
I
did
hear
you
mentioned
that
in
the
spring
we
might
talk
about
like
land
acquisition
that
would
maybe
come
off
a
calendar
cycle
or
something
so
that
that's
on
my
list,
so
I'm
happy
to
hear
that's
coming
back.
B
One
thing
I
didn't
hear
throughout
this
is
something
we
might
talk
more
about
when
we
look
at
luige,
but
it
may
impact
us
we
keep
trying
to
with
some
of
these
projects
eke
out
some
more
bedrooms,
larger
size
units
and
I
know
I
mean
we
consistently
referred
everything,
as
you
know,
number
of
units
number
of
units
here
and
there,
but
we
don't
refer
to
number
of
bedrooms
very
often
I,
wonder
if
that's
something
we
want
to
weigh
in
I
mean
our
own
studies
say
you
know
one
bedrooms
and
efficiencies
are
the
highest
need,
and
then
we
have
our
Housing
Authority
saying
you
know
their
biggest
need
is
efficiency
in
one
bedroom
as
well,
but
over
and
over
what
that
means
is
we're
not
building
affordable
family
size
units
we're
sometimes
getting
two
units
or
two
bedrooms,
or
sometimes
three
here
and
there,
but
on
the
long
planning
range
we're
just
not
creating
large
family
size
units
I
think
that's
something
we
may
want
to
kind
of
push
through
all
policies,
if
possible,
I'll
be
thinking
more
on
that,
but
just
kind
of
plug
that
one
I
did
notice
just
for
presentation
reasons
when
we're
looking
at
that
HTF
fundings
flag,
you
may
want
to
add
that
one
of
the
ways
it
gets
funded
is
potentially
through
the
hotel
approval
rubric
Community
benefits
table,
because
that
does
bring
money
in
there.
B
Ever
this
might
include
this
might
take
a
lot
of
work,
so
the
answer
is
probably
no,
but
did
we
ever
do
like
an
exit
interview
on
these
things
to
say,
okay?
Well,
we
started
thinking
that
was
going
to
be
worth
this
much
and
the
loan
would
be
this
much
and
Luigi
would
be
this
much
and
now
that
it's
all
done,
how
did
it
pan
out?
B
C
I,
don't
think
so.
You
know
for
preparing
the
bond
reports
and
updates.
We
definitely
we
did
go
back
to
some
of
our
projects
and
look
at
you
know
what
Public
Funding
was
put
into
those
projects
and
then
what
was
the
ultimate
kind
of
ultimate
cost?
Total
cost
like
how
much
did
our
public
dollars
Leverage
and
what's
the
final
tax
value,
but
that's
not
really
the
full
answer
to
what
you're
asking
well.
B
And
I
think,
as
we
venture
into
this
getting
more
information
in
line
with
the
county,
maybe
that's
something
both
entities,
the
county
and
City-
could
be
thinking
about.
You
know
how
do
we
assure
that
some
of
these
decisions
and
policies
we're
making
are
effective?
Is
there
a
way
to
look
at
a
closeout
or
exit?
If
we
have
the
performers
ahead,
you
know.
Maybe
we
can
see
one
at
the
end.
B
Last
thing
is
so
it's
interesting
to
me
that
ahac
is
some
of
ahac
is
interested
in
voting
on
this
sometimes
I
think
when
we
get
you
know,
our
goals
are
to
get
as
much
affordable
housing
as
possible
and
the
more
steps
we
add
the
harder
it
becomes
to
create
this
and
more
of
a
headache.
It
comes
to
developers
the
more
time
it
adds
so
I'm,
a
little
hesitant
on
that
I
love
their
input
and
I
love
this
new
Dynamic,
where
we're
getting
direct
feedback
at
these
meetings.
B
Part
of
me
wants
to
go
even
the
other
direction
and
say:
can
we
get
these
policies
to
a
place
where
they're
so
strong
that
staff
can
actually
just
administer
them
and
I
know?
That's
not
always
legal
but
like
getting
them
to
consent,
agenda
items.
There's
you
know
I'm
just
not
sure
that
they
will
want
more
review
and
more
management.
If
we,
if
we
know
the
policies
are
strong,
should
we
be
looking
at
less
time
unless
you
know
just
putting
it
out,
there
is
to
think
about.
Is
the
other
end
of
that
again.
E
So
I
want
to
take
a
minute
to
respond
to
a
comment
you
made
a
little
earlier,
chair,
Turner,
where
you
were
discussing
the
cap.
We
had-
and
you
said
something
along
the
lines
of
because
we
have
been
ignoring
the
cap.
I
need
to
push
back
a
little
bit
and
say,
and
then
you
said
you
hope
we
don't
come
up
with
a
new
thing
and
ignore
that
I
want
to
push
back
and
say:
I,
don't
look
at
it
as
ignoring
I.
E
Look
at
it
as
seeing
the
policy
as
written
having
developers
or
specific
developments
come
before
us
and
weigh
the
benefit
and
the
cost
and
making
a
decision
as
a
body
that
we
believe
it
is
best
to
move
forward
with
the
current
city
council.
I
I
can
allow
that
to
sit
that
we
just
haphazardly
ignore,
and
secondly,
I
will
also
bring
up
the
notion
of.
E
B
E
Back
the
notion
going
further
into
the
discussion
of
ahec
wishing
oh.
E
Four
they
come
before
us
I
agree
that
it
doesn't
necessarily
need
to
be
won
every
time,
but
perhaps
it
could
be
something
that
is
left
to
the
discretion
of
the
developer,
because
from
what
I
understand
from
ahex
meeting
their
hope,
quite
frankly,
is
to
provide
another
layer
of
review
such
that
when
develop
foreign.
E
C
I
can
add
to
what
you're
saying
I
think
that's
a
good
point.
So
they
brought
up
this
issue
of
being
concerned
around
when
developers
bring
forward
a
project
and
if
there's
like
kind
of
a
NIMBY
response
from
the
community
wanting
to
advocate
for
that,
but
I,
don't
I
think
advocacy
for
affordable
housing
and
funding
decisions
are
we
need
to
keep
those
are
separate
and
I
and
I
think
I
mean
I,
get
the
connection
for
sure
and
I
think
Ahab
can
definitely
show
up
to
any
council
meeting
and
and
advocate
for
a
project.
C
I
am
I
will
say
that
just
two
things
to
inform
this
a
little
bit
our
plan
with
this
annual
cycle
is
that
we're
going
to
be
bringing
a
batch
of
applications
together,
so
I,
don't
I
think
it's
either
their
voting
or
they're
giving
comment
or
whatever
it
is.
C
But
it's
going
to
be
on
all
of
them
together
and
I,
don't
think,
like
developers,
I
think
if
a
developer
wants
to
come
and
talk
about
their
project
just
to
come
talk
to
them
and
let
them
know
about
it,
yeah
absolutely
that
could
be
up
to
the
developer,
but
I.
Don't
want
I,
don't
think
it
makes
sense
for
a
developer
to
be
like
in
terms
of
a
funding
decision,
saying
I
want
to
present
a
hack
or
not.
If
that
makes
sense
like
it's,
it's
going
to
be
all
coming
together.
All
at
once
in
one
batch.
B
C
So
I
mean
I,
think
yeah
if,
if
they
were
weighing
in
it'd,
be
staff
presenting
kind
of
what
we
would
present
to
you
all
here's
the
applications
here,
which
has
here's,
not
what
they're
asking
for
here's,
how
they
rate
it.
Here's
here's
staff's
recommendation
that
kind
of
thing
in.
C
And
so,
and
just
another
layer
here
is,
we
could
have
five
to
six
ahac
members
be
a
part
of
those
applications.
Oh.
C
Mean
the
remaining
members
could
right
right.
The
remaining
members
could
make
comment
and
that's
fine,
but
we
have
I
mean
the
Housing
Authority
represented.
We
have
a
major
construction
company.
We
have
a
major
engineering
firm,
we've
got
a
small
developer,
we've
got
habitat
and
yeah.
That's
so
I
am
I
am
a
little
concerned
about
that.
But
if
they
wanted
to
make
comment
as
a
body
you
know
on
on
generally
that's
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
that
and
I've
been
doing
that
with
them
bringing
them.
C
C
D
I
wanted
to
ask
something
about
moving
to
a
set
application
schedule.
D
I
know
the
notion
was
brought
up
that
we
do
a
second
round
for
smaller
projects,
but
I'm
thinking
more
on
the
equity
piece
for
smaller
development
groups
and
development
groups,
who
are
new
starters
if
this
funding
cycle
would
kind
of
throw
them
off,
because
they're
not
actually
prepared
this
early
next
year
for
their
project
to
be
reviewed.
D
So
as
we
move
into
having
a
set
schedule,
I'm
wondering
the
first
few
years,
we
offer
a
second
funding
cycle
for
folks
who
might
not
be
prepared
at
the
top
of
each
year
for
funding
decision
to
be
made.
C
That's
helpful
and
we
also
were
thinking
something
like
when
we
have
guidelines
for
site
Readiness
kind
of
program
which
covers
those
soft
costs
that
are
not
covered
currently
by
Housing
Trust
guidelines
that
that
that
kind
of
a
fund
would
be
on
a
rolling
basis,
because
you
can't
really
that
seems,
that's
a
little
bit
more
there'll,
be
smaller
amounts
and
I.
Think
I,
think
that's
rolling
basis
would
make
sense
for
that
kind
of
a
thing.
B
I'll,
go
back
and
listen
to
the
ahac
meeting
as
well.
Sounds
like
a
lively
discussion:
okay,
I!
Don't
think
you
didn't
need
an
action
on
this.
After
all,
right
we
were
just
gonna,
hear
yeah
provide
feedback.
Okay!
Is
that
enough
feedback
on
all
of
your
items.
C
C
We
did
look
at
that
and
currently
the
scoring
Matrix
favors,
the
one
bedrooms
which
gets
to
your
concern
about
having
these
other
units
two
and
three
bedroom
units
I
did
a
local
housing
developer
was
kind
enough
to
share
with
me
two
Market
studies
they
did
this
year
and
one
of
them
covers
a
substantial
amount
of
the
city-
not
quite
maybe
not
quite
half,
but
it
was
interesting
to
see
the
demand
because
in
those
Market
studies
they
see
demand,
you
know
for
a
number
of
bedrooms,
so
the
demand
for
number
of
one
and
two
bedrooms
were
almost
equal
and
three
bedrooms
was
less.
C
Four
bedrooms
was
substantially
less
like
much
smaller,
but
there
still
is
demand
there.
But
so
we
we
just
haven't
had
time
yet
to
kind
of
really
delve
into
this.
So
I
think
we
will
be
bringing
forward
a
recommendation
on
that
to
you
to
a
hack
and
then
to
you
in
December,
so
I
think
really
what
we'd
want
to,
in
my
mind,
is
how
how
do
you
incentivize
having
a
good
mix
like
we
definitely
still
need
a
lot
of
one
bedrooms,
but
we
don't
want
you
to
do
only
one
bedroom
so.
B
It's
hard,
if
you
build
like
200
one
in
one
bedrooms
and
then
you
throw
in
three
three
bedrooms
in
the
corner.
What
family
wants
to
live
in
a
complex
of
all
single
individuals
like
there's
some
you
know,
and
then
you
get
into
the
tax
credit
projects
and
they
have
requirements
of
playgrounds
and
adjacency
to
schools
and
stuff.
So
there's
we're
achieving
in
some
ways,
but
then
they're
not
even
doing
three
bedrooms
a
lot.
B
So
maybe
there's
some
play
in
those
where
we
know
that
it's
going
to
be
a
welcoming
environment
of
families,
where
it's
tax
credit,
there's
playgrounds
and
so
on.
Maybe
we
have
some
extra
points
there
for
family
size
or
something,
but
you
know
I,
just
I
struggle
when
I
see
a
three
bedroom
and
a
sea
of
one
bedrooms.
C
And
what
and
what
I've
been
told
by
you
know
some
some
folks
say
you
know
two
and
three
bedrooms
are
actually
the
cheaper
ones
to
build
you're.
Just
adding
one
bedroom.
You
don't
have
to
add
a
bathroom,
you
don't
have
to
add
a
kitchen,
you
know
so
from
a
cost
perspective.
You
know
you're,
not
necessarily
requiring
I.
Guess
once
you
get
to
three
and
four.
Maybe
you
want
a
second
bathroom,
but.
B
So
this
comes
up
a
lot
more
in
the
Luigi
side,
when
I
talk
out
in
the
world
with
people
building
these
things.
So
maybe
we'll
talk
more
in
length,
then,
okay,
thank
you
very
great
discussion.
Any
other
comments,
questions
from
staff
or
Council
women.
B
Okay,
all
right.
Well.
That
concludes
item
number
three
on
our
agenda
for
those
of
you
listening
at
home,
and
that
leaves
us
with
item
number
four,
which
is
public
comment.
I
didn't
see
any
before.
Do
we
have
anyone
on
the
line
Katie?
No,
we
do
not.
Okay,
I
guess
we
answered
their
questions
too
looks
like
we'll
be
done
a
little
early
today,
because
that's
everything
on
the
agenda.
B
Thank
you
to
everyone
for
participating
today,
especially
those
of
you
at
home
and
listening
in
big
thanks
to
staff
for
getting
all
of
this
out
so
quickly
and
one
last
big
congratulations
to
to
councilwoman
on
their
recent
re-election.
I.
Think
with
that
we
are
adjourned,
have
a
great
rest
of
your
day.
Every.