Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06. June 2022 minutes NEW HANOVER COUNTY-CITY OF WILMINGTON WORKFORCE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE JUNE 1, 2022 | REGULAR MEETING Committee Members Present: Sharm Brantley, Frank Smith, Melanie James, Paul Stavovy, Eric Knight, Katrina Knight, Sarah Arthur Staff Present: Tufanna Bradley (NHC), Rachel LaCoe (NHC), Rebekah Roth (NHC), Suzanne Rogers (CoW) , Sarah Lipkin Sularz (NHC), Andrew Zeldin (NHC), Karlene Ellis Vitalis (NHC), Marissa Waiter (MPA Fellow) Others: Nina Herzog, Vanessa Lacer (Pender County) Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 3:20 p.m. Chairperson Brantley and quorum was established. Agenda Approval and Minutes Ms. Katrina Knight made a motion to approve the June agenda, seconded by Mr. Eric Knight and adopted by vote. Public Comments Ms. Nina Herzog stated that there is a definite lack of affordable multi-family dwellings for those who make $35,000 to $60,000, and that the luxury apartments and new construction is driving up market rate prices for established units, even those without any improvements. Her out-of-pocket housing cost is well above her take-home pay, especially when considering other living expenses. She stated that she has surveyed 50 local apartment complexes and the average rental price (for a 2 bed 1 bath) was $1,213. With an average income of $50,000, 30% of that is only $800-900 a month. Her conclusion is that the average price is well above 30-33% of income levels for many residents in New Hanover County. That is above what the recommended costs of housing should be by national standards. Ms. Herzog stated that people are moving out and leaving Wilmington due to the specific lack of below market rate units. She stated she would like the group to “lock down” on luxury apartments and start building basic affordable living without having 2 or 3 jobs. New Business Ms. Rachel LaCoe discussed the proposed updates to the committee by-laws. There is the interlocal agreement and then the by-laws. The changes can be brought to City and County managers for approval. The changes that were discussed at last meeting were updating area median income (AMI) from 0-120 percent of area median AMI. Ms. Brantley wanted to have a definitive action item from the committee for things that we can proactively work on, rather than not making progress. Members are looking for measurables and deliverables. Ms. LaCoe referred to the interlocal agreement to give the committee the tools to meet their goals and milestones so that they can be proposed to leaders. Mr. Smith mentioned there are certain tax amendments for things that we are allowed to do and spell out a work plan for the next year. Ms. Suzanne Rogers mentions using this document for actions of the committee to reference the work that is being done. Ms. LaCoe mentions that housing needs to be mentioned in 3.5.4 “Work Plan.” Members would also like to work off post-covid numbers rather than pre-covid. Mr. Knight mentioned that if committee starts getting granular is that going to pin us in one specific corner than all the possibilities that could be accomplished. Ms. LaCoe mentioned that the work plan is the action. We come together to gather skills from all committee members to narrow down our official work plan. Ms. Bradley says that these advisory committees are general on purpose so that they can create goals and objectives and can add more detail as a subcommittee, but the original work plan should stay broad. The plan helps facilitate goals and objectives so that the work can then be presented. Ms. LaCoe mentions that all annual updates were put on hold during the pandemic and once we get further in the work plan, we will have a better benefit. Ms. Knight mentions that the communication to get before county commissioners and city of Wilmington. Sharm asked if members can speak to some of the comments. June is housing month, so it is important to bring this to their attention while working on this work plan. If the group nails down how to tie into the strategic plan, a Public Awareness Plan for action can be proposed to County and City but work group would need to be clearer. Ms. Roth mentioned that this funding should be used in future budget years as it would be good opportunity to get back in front of both boards and update them on work plan. This is helpful as June is budget season and it helps map out an educational campaign that can be budgeted. There are a lot of things that the group can do using existing resources. It is tied into the operating budget, that way it provides an update on where we stand and what the numbers look like. Subcommittees • Katrina Knight, Sharm, Tom Gale, and Paul Statovy would like to volunteer for the Advocacy Committee. Ms. LaCoe mentions a subcommittee for each of our strategies so that members feel most effective. A WHAC member states that the Awareness Campaign is behind schedule and that there should be a marketing campaign. Ms. Roth adds that the County can use billboards as a portion of this type of outreach campaign. Ms. Roth also mentions the County has a website platform. However, there are limitations in start time due to County budget and Strategy’s schedule. Ms. Knight asserts that we should start to research funding sources such as the Housing Coalition to fund through a non-profit that accomplishes the same goals. She says that sub-committee (sub-WHAC) meetings could start sooner than later. Ms. Roth also argues that the planning department has more capacity to move some of this forward. The question of whether an individual can respond to RFP for funding is raise, to which the response is yes. Ms. Knight mentions coming up with 15-minute presentations that anyone can be trained on, to deliver to external housing groups. The Housing Coalition is working on this type of presentation, but she wants to know if people at NHC PLU would be willing to look at a draft of the presentation. Ms. LaCoe agrees that this would be a possibility. Ms. LaCoe wants to know if the subcommittee could be elected as officers and that there is one more position when we meet in July. Ms. Roth proposed a draft framework of what the workplan will look like i.e., presentations, when the work will be done, what the content is, OR all together. Sharm would like to meet with a strategist about how to best approach this. Paul mentioned that he would like to find some balance between planning department and committee members. Paul would like to have more buy-in of the workplan and make sure members are all on the same page when we are working through. Ms. Knight posed the question of someone in county staff can create marketing and when they. Advocacy vs. education and maybe not going to NHC Communications and Outreach rather than third-party. Action Item: All motion to approve the amendment for interlocal agreement for submission as written. All in favor. Motion to approve by-laws to managers By-laws would be implemented through the county. Program is through ARP funding, so Ms. LaCoe asks if there is any wording that needs to be changed. This will be proposed to commissioners on June 20th. In an advisory capacity, it is proposed that they shift what this plan looks like. Mr. Smith brought up the point of private rental companies. Ms. Roth wants to make sure that there are guarantees in place where you must have requirements in place rather than heavily monitoring compliance. If there is a built-in affordability for economic sustainability over time. *The difference between affordable housing vs, workforce housing and preventing homes that adapt to the housing market. How does workforce housing get the supply to catch up? Site-based rental assistance for low-income people it is hard to figure out the low-income subsidy. Tenant-based rather than location- based. Ms. Knight asks, “how can they subsidize the units that may not be sustainable due to the funding?” Ms. Roth mentions that we want to prioritize getting units on the ground but not limiting the proposals to just that because there might be other great proposals out there that were not identified in this RFP priority list. The proposals received will inform and help us understand what should be funded in the future RFP’s. There will be a staff committee going through submittals making sure everything is in place and identifying possible recommendations. The sub-committee would make the funding decisions which would decide how funding would be allocated. 3 members be the appointees, but this will be presented to commissioners on June 20.th Construction/ Rehabilitation Evaluation Criteria Ground-breaking by July of next year. Someone who applied for funding would determine what the best timeframe is and when to apply so that the project moves faster and making sure that everything is staying consistent in terms of supply and demand. With the RFP is there going to be an application or is it going to be standard? Roth says it will be more specific in terms of what will need to be provided or if commissioners change the application criteria. A single person or developer would be able to apply for the same things. Bonus points for areas that take vouchers. Priority is shovel-ready and number of units. Ms. Knight mentioned that those that are providing more housing should have more of an incentive and have higher weight on those priorities. Affordability must be measured as well as target AMI. Breakdown of 120 points? Sub-committee would need criteria in terms of best use of impact and financially viable to make determinations. Ms. LaCoe wants to keep the HUD AMI number. Fair-market rent: from voucher perspective it is appropriate but could go up in costs quickly. Ms. Roth states that instead of putting an amount, it would be more appropriate to fund a specific project. Old Business None Announcements 1. Canopy Point goes before City Council on the 7th but they are looking for people to come to the comment hearing period. It is tax-credit project. The project is approved but they hinge on annexation; is it going to be affordable or not? 2. August meeting set for the 3rd. 3. Committee will be electing chairperson. 4. Coordination of subcommittee meeting tbd. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned by Mr. Knight second by Ms. Knight at 4:53pm