Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) meeting called to order on November 28th, 2023 at 1:01pm by Chair Cory Weaver. She requested Roll Call.
Present: Cory Weaver
Kristen Dreyer
Tasha Osbourne
Davida Randolph
David Layman
Gwendolyn Dawson
Excused: Henry Samuels
Quorum was met. Dr Gwendolyn Dawson arrived at 1:09 pm.
Proof of Public Notice was read into the record and was posted on November 9th, 2023 on the City of Ocala CDS website.
Ms. Cory Weaver requested a motion be made to approve minutes from the last two meetings on June 28th and October 25th, 2023, respectively. Motion to approve.
Kristen Dreyer-1st
Davida Randolph-2nd
All in Favor-5-0
Mr. James Haynes, Director of Community Development Services (CDS), welcomed the Board members and started the meeting discussion with Agenda Item# 4, Affordable Housing Projects. The Roney project is the first rebuild since Mr. Haynes became Director. It started off as a rehabilitation project, but the contractor recommended rebuilding as a more cost-effective move. The recommendation was approved by Council. It’s a 3 bedroom, 2 bath, approximately 1,200 SF home for Ms. Roney and her children. CDS had to help her find a place to live while the rebuild was conducted and partnered with the Ocala Housing Authority, and rented one of their units close to the Mary Sue Rich Center where the family stayed while the 9-month project was completed. Before and After pictures were shared of the outdoor and indoor of the house as well as the ribbon cutting event. CDS will make ribbon-cutting events available for the Committee to participate in.
Most of the rebuilds are paid out of the HOME funds. CDS is in a consortium with Marion County Community Services for HOME funds. We have three (3) funding sources, SHIP, HOME and CDBG. HOME funds are set aside for dire projects based on cost analysis. CDBG funds are used for demolition. There’s currently roughly $1M available and CDS anticipates building 4 additional homes built this fiscal year.
Ms. Dreyer: Is that between the City and the County?
Mr. Haynes: That’s just the City. We have about 115 persons on our waiting list right now. We got $747K in SHIP in July, and in 90 days, we had all that money encumbered. There’s a great need and we are getting more funding than usual, so we are able to do a sizeable amount of projects. Any other questions, comments?
Ms. Weaver: The 2019 grant… How long are those funds good for? You can continue to use those?
Mr. Haynes; For the HOME money is 5 years to spend that money. SHIP is 2 years and CDBG is 3 years. We have a lengthier time with HOME but we will not have any money sitting around. We use it very quickly. The County has been very cooperative; their rehab program is different to the City’s. We do full rehabs and the County does major things life roofs, HVAC, plumbing. This creates more funding to be spent, and the County has allotted the City additional funds to carry out City projects in the last couple years saving many units in the City. The City budgets projects depending on the severity of the repairs. HOME and SHIP grants can only be used for housing activities. Unlike CDBG that can be used for public facilities, sidewalks, and other types of projects besides housing. CDBG is the most flexible grant and we use most of our CDBG monies for housing activities as we get less than half a million dollars, so to put monies into sidewalks has less of an impact conducting housing rehabilitation.
Dr. Gwendolyn Dawson joined the meeting at 1:09 pm.
Ms. Dreyer: We agree with that.
Mr. Haynes: Yes, Ma’am, thank you. The CDBG dollars impact is greater from a housing standpoint as it provides construction jobs that otherwise would not exist, it gives contractors opportunities that otherwise will not be there, and saves housing units that would otherwise be lost.
The next major item on the agenda today is the AHAC Annual Report. It is statutorily mandated by the state for all municipalities and government entities that receive SHIP funding. In order for us to be in compliance and eligible for future SHIP funding, this Committee has to exist. It used to be a 3-year report that was presented to the State by this Committee addressing the hurdles and impediments to affordable housing. Last year, it was changed to an annual report. This year we will address eleven (11) categories and forward the Committee’s recommendation to the City Council. The Council may receive the recommendations as informational items or move on them and adopt them as ordinances.
There are 2 categories that are mandatory and have to be in the report every year, expedited permitting for affordable housing projects as well as reviewing the ordinances that deal with affordable housing on a regular basis. Historically, the City has chosen to focus on 7-8 of the 11 categories. That was permissible with 3 years to work on them. With a one-year timeframe, the Committee decided last year to have more of a laser focus and there were 4 items recommended to City Council.
Mr. Haynes proceeded to go thru the 2023 Draft of the AHAC Report with the Committee. A hot topic last and this year has been the surplus lands. There are projects in place that will be discussed in this meeting. Mr. Haynes went over the Background section of the report. He mentioned the Affordable Housing Incentive Fund designed to help monetarily in an effort to incentivize the development of affordable housing as one of the City’s initiatives. Mr. Haynes referenced Florida statutes and affordability thresholds.
Dr. Dawson: So what exactly do you consider affordable? The 81% to 120%?
Mr. Haynes: It depends. Affordability is per family. It is different for everyone. We try to identify the projects - workforce (120%-140%); moderate (80% - 120%); someone at 50% is going to be a homeowner with the assistance of the Section 8 program. In Marion County, the City, the County and Marion County Housing Finance, have adopted a home median income of $253K to be sold and considered affordable at any rate. No homes can be sold over that point. Families cannot spend over 30% of their monthly income on housing, so families will have to be qualified and evaluated to ensure it is affordable for that family.
Dr. Dawson: So as long as their PITI is not over 30%?
Mr. Haynes: Yes, Ma’am. This applies to projects where we donate land or we build ourselves. We try to be flexible, but we don’t want applicants to get into dire situations.
Ms. Osbourne: It has to be sustainable so that they are able to afford that even if there are challenges like if they stop working.
Mr. Haynes: Yes, absolutely.
Further review of the 2023 AHAC Draft Report ensued. Mr. Haynes shared the four (4) of the 11 incentives adopted last year, namely:
• Expedited Process of Development Approvals
• Flexible Lot Considerations
• Ongoing Regulatory Review Process
• Surplus Lands Inventory
Mr. Haynes: We can go through the strategies and the Committee has the ability to include or take away either of these incentives if you feel we are not to focus on them the next year. Whether Council adopts these as ordinances or not, a lot of these incentives will still direct the procedures of Growth Management as well as Community Development. For instance, the City Council did not adopt any of these ordinances last year, but there is a complete plan for our surplus lands inventory that has been adopted and will move forward. So, don’t think that because Council does not make it local law, that it is not important or does not have a place in what the City does daily.
Mr. Haynes read the incentive strategies and discussed last year Committee recommendations. Highlighted items were reviewed. Permit review timeline challenges were discussed.
Incentive Strategy (a) Expedited process of development approvals
The Building Department makes a concerted effort to ensure prompt review and approval. Challenges are handled by specific employees. The City endeavors to make it a user-friendly process for our contractors to do business with the City. The City is pushing to address affordable housing projects in 20 days instead of 25 business days.
Ms. Dreyer: James, what internally flags it that it’s an affordable housing project.
Mr. Haynes: Right now, the contractor identifies the project as an affordable housing project. Internally, we have developed an application for the Affordable Housing Fund, and we will have the contractor include that with their permit application so that the permit technicians can flag it in the system accordingly.
Ms. Dreyer: I know that my private companies have built the same model home in the City of Ocala on numerous lots, nothing has changed, and yet it still goes back and forth. So, however we can overcome that challenge of reinventing the wheel every time on something that some of these builders have done, I would say that’s where we need to focus. When you are rebuilding a house that you are demoing, it’s a different story because you are starting from scratch. But for builders like Habitat for Humanity, who build the same model over and over again, there should be like an easy process.
Mr. Haynes: Yes, Ma’am.
Dr. Dawson: I have a question… what are some of the things that you think are holding them up. What happens?
Ms. Dreyer: So for us, and I mean this with all due respect to our staff, it seems like they use the maximum amount of time to get back to my clients with a change, and then my client submits the change, even though we have done this before and we are unclear why we even need to do the change but we just go along with the program, then they take the maximum amount of time again, and then suggest another change instead of just suggesting all the changes at once. Does that make sense? Do you hear that a lot?
Mr. Hale: Yes. Aubrey Hale, Planning Director for the City. Some of it is what information gets submitted and sometimes it could be the same plan but yet they may have missed some other follow-up documentation that needs to go with it. It can be a matter of who is submitting the plan, it could be a different person submitting it than previous submittals. Hopefully, the reviews are pretty much the same and we are not asking for additional information. If that is the case, then we will take it back and look at that.
Right now we have 3 different ways you can submit permits and it’s making it very confusing and creating a backlog. We are working on narrowing it down. Our computer software GovSense never fully got operational on the building side. We are switching gears and going to Central Square which is an updated version of TrakIt. That should be a seamless transition where we update that portal. And then we will really consolidate to just going through the portal and doing over the counter submittals. So those would be the two submittal options. Right now, we have email included. People will email the application, submit it through the portal, and then they will try to come in. Then they will have 3 applications and create a tremendous amount of backlog. So, we will be shifting gears. Once the portal is fully up and running, probably within about 6 to 8 months, after we get that fully implemented, that should help to expedite or building review times. Because right now what we are really seeing its not even the review cycle, it’s just getting the application process. That’s been the hang up. That will be our primary focus.
Right now, there’s a tremendous amount of work being conducted between the City and the County. Statutorily we actually have 30 days, from the time an application is submitted to review those. Once we get into the review process, we try to stick to 5-7 days on each review cycle. Then after that, it depends on the responsiveness of the applicant to address comments.
More discussion ensued regarding the permitting process timelines. Quarterly meetings with local contractors was mentioned as a consideration.
Dr. Dawson: I have a question, Mr. Haynes. On the liaison, is that person working now?
Mr. Haynes: This was a recommendation that we talked about the last couple of years. We don’t have an affordable housing liaison. The idea was to have someone not associated with the City or the County to help monitor affordable housing projects. But we have not settled in on anyone.
Is there anything you all would like to change in the strategies or are all those good to carry forward again?
Incentive Strategy (b) Impact fee modifications, waivers or reimbursements
No recommendations were made last year.
Mr. Haynes: We are in the process of amending that ordinance. We made changes to increase the participation from 80% to 120% to provide a wider range of people that can access the Affordable Housing Fund (AHF). We are also suggesting to increase the per unit amount from $10K to 20K a unit. I know Mr. Hale is working on other additions and changes to make it more flexible. We’ve added the opportunity to possibly use it for a revolving loan process. We are loosening the reigns to make it more accessible to help incentivize developers build more affordable housing.
Mr. Hale: As we are looking at those additional options when we make our recommendation for the Code amendment that will go forward, it will also include doing some kind of down payment assistance as an option as well, especially if the project falls in one of the CRA areas, then the CRA has the ability through its grant programs to allot money for affordable housing. Therefore, it would be sort of a double-dipping where we could have CRA cover some impact fees and then have down payment assistance that could be a backup that comes out of the Affordable Housing Incentive Fund (AHIF). Those are some ways that we are trying to capitalize on the different areas that we have, so the Code needs to be amended. It would go to the December P&Z and then to City Council in January for consideration.
The current ½ cent fee on the building permits may be beefed up to a penny to ensure, depending on how much of it is utilized, that the AHIF will be replenished on a long-term basis. Currently, that is the only method used to fund the AHIF, the ½ cent fee applied to the dollar value of the permit, but residential and commercial.
Mr. Layman: How much remains in that incentive fund now?
Mr. Hale: All total, around $1M, but roughly half of it is entitled already. There’s 2 projects that are currently under construction looking to complete in the next 3 to 4 months. And then there’s another project that has about $460K that is tied to a developer’s agreement that we have to support an additional affordable housing project in the West Ocala area.
Mr. Layman: Have any of those come out of the ground yet?
Mr. Hale: Two of them are; one is off of NE 3rd Street and it is nearing completion and almost ready for COs. The other is under construction, and probably will be completed around March or April 2024. The other project is part of that 9% tax credit program, and they don’t award those until January or February of every year, so we would not know if they have been awarded until that time next year.
Ms. Dreyer: Does the County also collects that affordable housing fee?
Mr. Haynes: No, they do not. Any other questions with the affordable housing fund?
Incentive Strategy (c - Flexibility in density
Mr. Haynes: The City proactively uses density bonuses to facilitate affordable housing. No recommendation were made last year in this category.
Incentive Strategy (d) - Reservation of infrastructure capacity
Mr. Haynes: We did not make a recommendation last year. Aubrey touched on that we are really working to take advantage of the things that are in place now, layering some of those with our grant funding, CRA and affordable housing fund.
Incentive Strategy (e) - Accessory dwelling units
Mr. Haynes: This was something we did not recommend last year. It is gaining momentum in the metropolitan areas amongst the affordable housing communities.
Incentive Strategy (f) - Reduction of parking and setback requirements
Mr. Haynes: The City doesn’t have requirements that have been imposed that have been an issue. Parking is not an impediment for affordable housing, and we decided not to make any recommendations last year.
Incentive Strategy (g) - Flexible lot considerations
Mr. Haynes: We did make recommendations. It is something the City has addressed. It has been flexible in allowing smaller lots to be built upon.
Mr. Hale: Basically, in the beginning of the year in 2023, we did an amendment to the existing lots of record; if the lot had at least 40 feet frontage and it had a structure on it at some point during that time frame, then the house could be built back in that condition. The affordable surplus land list that we took to the City Council in September 2023, many of the lots included in that list fall into the existing lots of record because they don’t have the adequate frontage. But the big issue was that the lot had to have a structure on it. That is something we might need to take a look at as we do our 2050 Vision update and address these non-conformities. That process will continue over the next year.
Mr. Layman: The 40-foot lots, if it had a structure on it before, could you build on it again?
Mr. Hale: Yes, and you could not enlarge it. It will basically have to stay within the envelope of what it was and show that you can meet the setbacks. If it gets split beyond that, it changes that dynamic. It has to be a lot that had a structure on with, it had at least 40-feet of frontage, and then you can build back as long as you can meet the setbacks.
Mr. Layman: Will there ever be a point in time where if it never had a structure on it you could still build on a 40-foot lot?
Mr. Hale: Currently, we don’t have that. That’s something that we could take back if that is a recommendation you want us to look at. How do we address some of the non-conforming lots, and if they are going to be used for affordable housing, that could be an option. Then we would have to amend the Code to allow for that.
Mr. Layman: We (Habitat for Humanity) in fact built 2 houses on 40-foot lots, they are 2-1s, obviously not a big house, they meet all the setback requirements. I can’t tell you if they ever had a structure on them. I will have to do some research on that, but they fit well where they are. It would be helpful for us at Habitat if that was not a restriction for a 40-foot lot, that it had to have a structure on it before.
Mr. Hale: OK, that is something we can take back and look at. I know the way we handle the majority of the small lots right now is through the PD process; you have to have at least an acre and you can design it at that point. We can bring it to the Vision group as well and take a look at it.
Dr. Dawson: How can an agency or organization apply for any of the surplus lots?
Mr. Haynes: We are working on putting together an RFP that will go out in a couple weeks. For non-profits, we are actually locating properties that are near other structures. We are looking to possibly donating some lots, but they will have to be built out in 18 months. Right now, we have 61 lots on the initial list that are ready to be built out. We will have seven (7) going out in the next few weeks. About half of the 61 lots are sizeable properties that Mr. Hale will be developing as multi-family; the scattered lots will be handled by Community Programs. Properties in close proximity to non-profit partners like Habitat and the Housing Authority will be set aside and offered to non-profit partners that develop affordable housing.
Mr. Layman made a motion recommending that the City would allow 40-foot lots that did not have a structure on it before, be eligible to build affordable homes on them.
Seconded by Dr. Dawson.
All in Favor: 6-0 for recommendation to be added to the strategy
Incentive Strategy (h) - Modification of street requirements
Mr. Haynes: No recommendation. City uses modified street requirements for affordable housing.
Incentive Strategy (i) - Ongoing regulatory review process
Mr. Haynes: This is a mandated strategy that has to be in the plan each year. Mr. Haynes read last year’s recommendations.
Incentive Strategy (j) - Surplus lands inventory
Mr. Haynes: This has been a labor of love. We have met extensively on a monthly basis working through lands owned by the City. The Live Local Act that came forward this past summer from the state required that by October 1st, a list of surplus lands be presented and posted to be used for affordable housing. Sixty-one (61) lots have been identified for immediate use. We will get them out on the market and see if there are contractors willing to build the units in an affordable price range.
We have Team of 10 from different departments, Procurement, Finance, Growth Management, Community Development Services, and Real Estate. We are engaging the community, partnering with profit and non-profit organizations. We should be able to create change and provide needed housing.
The Marion County Housing Finance Authority is working on a Community Land Trust for rental units that will help protect a lot of apartment units that will always remain affordable.
Mr. Layman: Hey James, we would be happy to welcome all 61 lots into our community land trust.
Mr. Haynes: Well, you are going to get some, not all 61.
Mr. Layman: Let me add something else when I say that… Not from a selfish motive, but to keep it in the affordable housing inventory so it doesn’t go away. We don’t want to profit off of it. Whatever we collect in the land lease from one of our family partners, goes into the affordable housing fund. So, if we get to the point where a family partner is going to come out, then those funds are isolated with that house. It would be the same way if we took them in for Ocala Housing or the City of Ocala, it will all be in the affordable housing inventory. Our land lease is $35/month for our family partners. It’s a 99-year lease and a 99-year renewal, I’m pretty sure no one is going to out-live that. This would keep it in an affordable housing inventory, not selfishly for us, but for the City of Ocala and Marion County.
Mr. Haynes: Yes, sir. Any other comments or questions?
Dr. Dawson: I had a question on the process that you are developing, is that something that will come back for us to take a peek at?
Mr. Haynes: Yes. One of the things we are working on is policies and procedures that will provide an understanding of what we are doing. We will present them to the Committee. We are getting input from contractors and looking at other areas that are doing well such as Tampa, Hillsborough, West Palm Beach, and others.
Incentive Strategy (k) - Transportation hubs and transit-oriented development
Mr. Haynes: Any other questions or recommendations on the report? The last one has to do with transportation hubs which is something we did not deal with as TPO handles that. We are promoting conversations that incentivize that affordable housing be built near bus lines and transportation, all that is part of the plan, as a lot of people need transportation.
Ms. Weaver: I think we had determined last time that it made more sense to try and build a bus hub near a subdivision than to build a subdivision near a bus hub.
Dr. Dawson: I agree.
Mr. Haynes: Absolutely. Any other recommendations? I think in the next 6 months we will have a better idea if these are the right incentives to look at and work with. By the time we get to this point next year, we will have a clearer idea of what works or don’t with the surplus lands. The Affordable Housing Fund will continue to be a big player. That has helped us help developers secure the 9% tax credit and develop affordable housing units. We will continue to layer funding sources and look at the CRA assistance. One thing we cannot control is the interest rate. If we can help that with downpayment and closing cost assistance, then that will soften the things we cannot control in the process.
Ms. Osbourne: There are buy-down interest rates lenders are doing with sellers. I just have a listing I am going through right now, is like $380K, and I know that is a higher price point but they got the mortgage of $299K and like $400 off the price, for the monthly payment, and that made it super affordable and the seller just contributed $11K. So, I think that having options or lenders as part of your process that know how to manage that, cause the buyer actually can’t pay down to buy down the rate that much, only the seller can. So as agents, we present that option, so the seller is not hurting himself.
Ms. Dreyer: Well, an $11K buydown is like a $60K price reduction. So the rate buydown, however we could figure that out internally, it’s really impactful.
Ms. Osbourne: And it’s for the life. If you need lender options, let me know.
Mr. Haynes. Yes, please share that. Also, we still have a couple vacancies on the Committee, one is someone from the banking industry and one is a for profit building developer. I thank you all for the time you dedicate to this and how engaged you are with this process as it helps us formulate what this City and County looks like in the next decade or two. I applaud you for all you do.
Madame Chair, that is all I have,
Ms. Weaver: Well, thank you James. We appreciate all the work you and your team have put into this process. Good information and you do it in a way that helps us understand it better. So we appreciate it and we wish you all a happy holiday and call this meeting adjourned.
Meeting adjourned at 2:10 pm.
/nc