The URL can be used to link to this page

Findings, Overview, Recommendations 2007BLE H USING SKFORCE FINllINGS OVER RECOMMENDATIONS October 25, 2007 Report subject to additional materials and other related content. AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE REPORT OUTLINE: 1- Taskforce Information: a. Current Taskforce roster 2- Executive Summary: 3- Short Term Objectives: a. Homeseekers Status Report July 2007- October 1, 2007 1. New Madison details 2. Otis details 3. Outline of Crisis Relocation Team- Homeseekers b. Emergency Housing Relocation Funding- Policy Implementation 1. City of Spokane Resolution 2. Overview of funding processes and allocations c. Affordable Housing Basics 1. How Housing Works Memo 4- Mid Term Objectives: a. Shelter + Care Program b. Turner Building Overview c. 2163 Funding d. Tenant Relocation Draft Ordinance- Policy Option 1. Seattle and State of Washington 2. City of Spokane- drafts, notes, comments 5- Long Term Objectives: a. Downtown Housing Matrix 1. Building upon current Matrix create City wide matrix b. At RISK buildings/ Potential buildings and Sites C. Housing Levy /Increasing Local Affordable Housing Resources- Policy review 7. City of Spokane Bond program, housing levy, development incentives d. Developing Affordable Housing - Policy review 1. Best practices from other cities and developers 6- Task Force Minutes 7- Policy Suggestions- Incentive Ideas /Options 8- Condo Conversion Information 9- DOC Housing 10- Policy- National Housing Trust Fund 11- Media /Articles �o `0&- " City of Spokane 1 1 Media Release www.spokanecity.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE July 2, 2007 Contact: Marlene Feist Public Affairs Officer (509) 625 -6740 CITY LEADS EFFORT TO ENSURE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS Solution requires state, county, city, and social service agencies Mayor Dennis Hession announced that the City of Spokane will lead a multi jurisdictional effort to address the availability of affordable housing within the Spokane region. The Mayor has established an Affordable Housing Task Force to tackle both immediate and long -term needs. "The need for affordable housing is a community problem that requires a "community solution," says Mayor Hession. "We must work together to find a solution that meets our needs." The task force will be made up of community leaders from government, social service agencies, and the private sector. They are being asked to create an emergency housing relocation policy' and plan to meet short-term community needs as well as a strategic long -term plan and policy for affordable housing that addresses needs for the. next 10 to 20 years. "We have a need —and a responsibility —to serve all residents within our community," says Rep. Timm Ormsby, who will serve on the Task Force. "The issue of affordable housing has been a priority of mine in the Legislature. It is clear that a solution will require funding from multiple sources— local, state, and federal agencies along with social service providers and the private sector." In addition to Rep. Ormsby, the Task Force will include: • Marty Dickinson, president of the Downtown Spokane Partnership, Chair. • Joe Shogan, City Council President, Vice Chair. • Cathy Mann, VOICES • Marilee Roloff, Volunteers of America • Christine McCabe, Avista Utilities and member of the City's Human Services Advisory Board and the 2163 Task Force. • Tobby Hatley, City's Community Development Board. • Jeff Nave, Downtown Spokane Partnership Board of Directors • Jim Kolva, Downtown Spokane Partnership Board of Directors. • Chris Batten, REN Corp. • Larry Soehren, Kiemle & Hagood Co. • Ray Rickers, Spokane Neighborhood Action Plan (SNAP) • Terry Lawhead, CTED. • Christine Barada, Spokane County Community Services. • Tom Tremaine, Northwest Justice Project. • Randall L. Fewel, Inland Northwest Bank. • Rev. Lonnie Mitchell, Bethel AME and representing six urban churches. • Arlene Patton, Spokane office of the federal Housing & Urban Development Department. • Police Chief Anne Kirkpatrick. • Fire Chief Bobby Williams "We have attracted over a billion dollars in new investment in our downtown, and we have succeeded in creating a place where all kinds of people want to live, work, and play," says Marty Dickinson, of the -DSP. "As a community we now need to decide how we will continue to offer a mix of housing that meets the needs of all." The immediate need for additional low- income housing comes from the anticipated sale and closure of both of the New Madison and Otis hotels, which have long served individuals with very low incomes. These sales are on top of the sale of the Commercial Building, which also served low- income residents. The work of the task force also should complement the ongoing work of a separate community task force that is evaluating housing and social service needs in the West Central neighborhood. The task force was formed earlier this year by Mayor Hession in response to concerns about the impact of proposed new developments in the West Central neighborhood. The City committed to working toward a goal of adding 25. affordable housing units in the neighborhood beyond what would have been created ordinarily by 2017. -30- AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY October 25, 2007 Marty Dickinson Chair, Affordable Housing Taskforce mdlckinson@downtownsl2okane.net 509- 456 -0580 City of Spokane Affordable Housing Task Force Solutions /Comments /Options July 24, 2007 Task Force members have submitted several solutions /comments /options which, I believe, are all starters! Overall, the. consensus is that we must increase the availability of affordable housing for persons at zero to 100 percent of Area Median Income (AMI). Since the downtown displacement of people at. zero to 30 percent of AMI was the catalyst in the formation of this task force, I propose that; at least for the short and mid terms, we focus efforts on providing homes for people of extremely low income. Over the long term, we do. want to assist people with incomes up to 100 percent of the AMI. In fact, there is a county -wide Affordable Homeownership Task Force that is currently . strategizing how to close the affordability gap for homeownership. The solutions /comments /options seem to fall into seven areas. I suggest that work groups comprised of staff, task force members, and other interested citizens and organizations. be formed to address each of the areas and report back to the Task Force. It also may be possible to combine some of the areas, thereby requiring fewer work groups. For example the Relocation and Relocation Policy work groups could be combined into one, as well as the Funding Coordination and Explore Future Funding work groups. Short Term Relocation Work Group Emergency /Short -term Housing Work Group -- Housing Crisis Team — consider -- Buy /lease motels extending this service if Otis residents are -- Construct tent city required to vacate - -Seek availability of other residential -- Dispersing relocation money buildings, as well as warehouse spaces -- Secure other resources, such as free bus -- Pursue the Turner Bldg. (30 rooms) passes -- Enlist help of churches people with challenging backgrounds --Keep Otis Hotel open Mid Term Relocation Policy Work Group Funding Coordination Work Group Draft Tenant Relocation Assistance Policy --2163 competitive State application -- Define owner and local govt. -- Offender re -entry State proposal (6159) responsibilities - -Local 2060 and 2163 programs -- Determine appropriate vacate notice -- Others? period - -Offer incentives to landlords to house people with challenging backgrounds Lana Term Area Housing Plans Work Group Explore Additional Funding Work Group Rehab/Develop/Purchase Work Group -- Research City and County -- Housing levy -- Purchase triplexes, Comp Plans, Consolidated -- Increase in sales tax duplexes Plan, Continuum of Care -- Single Room Occupancy -- Spread low income plans, and our Regional 10- (SRO) Mod Rehab HUD housing throughout Year Plan to Reduce funding Spokane and provide Homelessness -- Others? services at branch libraries -- Research population and and community centers other stats and studies (e.g., -- Provide incentives to from the annual American developers to include Community Survey) to affordable, e.g., workforce determine housing need for housing in their the next 5 to 10 years. developments -- Increase affordability requirement for Multi Family Tax Exempt properties -- Provide Tort relief for property owners -- Provide incentives to landlords that currently rovide low cost housing. :CE 0 CHAPTER CONTENTS 6.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................... ............................... 4 6.2 GMA GOAL AND REQUIREMENTS AND COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES ............... ..............................6 6.3 VISION AND VALUES ............. ............................... ..............................7 6.4 GOALS AND POLICIES ............................................ ..............................8 H 1 AFFORDABLE HOUSING .........................:... ............................... 8 H 1.1 Regional Coordination H 1.2 Regional Fair Share Housing H 1.3 Employer- Sponsored Housing H 1.4 Use of Existing Infrastructure H 1.5 Housing Information H 1.6 Fair Housing H 1.7 Socioeconomic Integration H 1.8 Affordable Housing Requirement H 1.9 Low- Income Housing Development H 1.10 Low - Income Housing Funding Sources H 1.11 Siting of Subsidized Low - Income Housing H 1.12 Permitting Process H 1.13 Building, Fire, Infrastructure, and Land Use Standards H 1.14 Performance Standards H 1.15 New Manufactured Housing H 1.16 Partnerships to Increase Housing Opportunities H 2 HOUSING CHOICE AND DIVERSITY ............ .............................11 H 2.1 Distribution of Housing Options H 2.2 Senior Housing H 2.3 Accessory Dwelling Units H 2.4 Development of Single -Room Occupancy Housing H 2.5 Special Needs Housing H 2.6 Distribution of Special Needs Housing H 2.7 Taxes and Tax Structure H 3 HOUSING QUALITY .................................. ............................... 13 H 3.1 Housing Rehabilitation H 3.2 Property Responsibility and Maintenance H 3.3 Housing Preservation H 3.4 Linking Housing With Other Land Uses H 3.5 Housing Goal Monitoring Comprehensive Plan W Last Revisions Effective 1 -17 -07 6.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter addresses the housing needs and issues of the City of Spokane. The housing chapter includes topics such as affordable housing, the provision of housing choices, and the overall quality of housing. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a coordinated set of goals, guidelines, and policies to direct future growth and development in the City of Spokane. Citizens developed the guiding content of this chapter in order to raise the "quality of life" for the current and future population. They recognized that housing satisfies the basic human need for shelter. With this need satisfied, it is hoped that a home leads to a pride in place, a bond with the community, and an increased ability to satisfy other human needs. Housing and the provision of housing have direct ties to the local economy. The lack of a home often leads to negative behavior and a diminished opportunity in life that is unacceptable to the community. Stress from excessive housing costs can cause other problems for households such as social, economic, and health- related concerns. Background and Current Trends Outlined in the Draft Comprehensive Plan/EIS, Volume 2, Housing, Chapter 20, are several factors that are projected to influence the housing needs of the community over the next twenty years. The background information provided in volume two addresses characteristics of the population and housing stock and also contains data related to planning for future growth. For example, the current aging trend of Spokane's population greatly affects the community by posing new challenges in relation to housing provision. With the "baby boom" generation reaching retirement, such issues become more prevalent. The housing chapter includes policies that influence both the public and private provision of housing. Most housing is financed and developed by the private sector. Although many market factors affect the ability of the private sector to provide affordable housing, many local government actions, which include land use policies, development regulations, infrastructure finance, and permitting processes, impact . housing affordability. When addressing the housing needs of lower - income households, public funding, incentive programs, and technical help all may be needed for housing development projects to be successful. This may include housing for people with special needs, disabilities, or the elderly. Overview The housing chapter, along with the other chapters of the Comprehensive Plan, provides the framework for the kind of growth and redevelopment that Spokane desires. The housing chapter outlines the direction that the city wishes to pursue in order to accommodate the housing needs of the population through the year 2020 and beyond. While housing is just one piece of the multifaceted landscape of Spokane, housing conditions have a direct impact upon the area's quality of life. Housing The strong links between housing and social needs and services are reinforced by the social health chapter, which covers the provision of special needs housing and social service programs. The land use chapter also addresses housing issues within its discussions concerning housing densities, types, and locations. Other land development issues, such as capacity for residential development and the land uses that are allowed near housing, are also discussed. Finally, the direction thischapter provides needs, to be monitored and adjusted when necessary. The last policy outlines a process for monitoring and reporting progress toward achieving the desired housing goals. This basic monitoring proce Comprehensive Plan 5 Last Revisions Effective 1 -17 -07 6.2 GMA GOAL AND REQUIREMENTS AND COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES GMA Housing Planning Goal (RCW 36.70A.020) The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) includes 13 goals, which were adopted to guide the development and adoption of comprehensive plans and development regulations. Housing is a required element under the GMA, which contains the following housing goal: "Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock." GMA Requirement for Housing Planning (RCW 36.70A.070) The GMA requires that each city prepare an inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing and that provisions are made for all economic segments of the community. The comprehensive plan must identify sufficient land for housing including, but not limited to, government assisted housing, housing for low- income families, manufactured housing, multifamily housing, group homes, and foster care facilities. Spokane County and its cities are required to plan cooperatively while accommodating the needs of the population. Countywide Planning Policies The Countywide Planning Policies (CWPPs), adopted by the Spokane Board of County Commissioners in 1994, include housing as one of the nine policy topics. The C WPPs overview of the GMA's requirements for housing planning states: "Affordable housing applies to a wide range of housing types at varying costs which can meet the needs of a diverse community. The marketplace is generally capable of meeting the housing demands of the upper income segment of the population. Therefore, the primary focus of these policies is on mechanisms to increase the availability of affordable housing for middle- and lower - income households. Such mechanisms may include regulatory reform, inclusionary zoning, mixed use developments, incentives for increased housing densities and other incentives to encourage a variety of housing types to meet the needs of a diverse population. The affordable housing policies provide a framework by which each jurisdiction can help meet the overall housing needs of Spokane County in a fair, consistent and coordinated fashion. They direct each jurisdiction to accommodate a wide variety of development and housing types; they call for consistency in development regulations and standards within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) and they encourage reform of regulations which are unnecessary or costly barriers to the provision of affordable housing." For the text of the nine policies, consult Policy Topic 7, "Affordable Housing" within the Countywide Planning Policies and Environmental Analysis for Spokane County, originally adopted December 22, 1994. Housing U 6.3 VISION AND VALUES Spokane Horizons volunteers identified important themes in relation to Spokane's current and future growth. A series of visions and values was crafted for each element of the Comprehensive Plan that describes specific performance objectives. From the Visions and Values document, adopted in 1996 by the City Council, the Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies were generated. Housing refers to housing availability, affordability, and mix. Vision "Affordable housing of all types will be available to all community residents in an environment that is safe, clean, and healthy. Renewed emphasis will be placed on preserving existing houses and rehabilitating older neighborhoods." Values "The things that are important to Spokane's future include: ♦ Keeping housing- affordable. Encouraging home ownership. , ♦ Maintaining pride in ownership. ♦ Developing a good mix of housing types. Encouraging housing for the low- income and homeless throughout the entire city. ♦ Preserving existing houses. Rehabilitating older neighborhoods." Comprehensive Plan 7 Last Revisions Effective 1 -17 -07 6.4 GOALS AND POLICIES Goals and policies provide specificity for planning and decision - making. Overall, they indicate desired directions, accomplishments, or aims in relation to the growth and development of Spokane. Additional supporting materials for this chapter are located in the Draft Comprehensive Plan/EIS, Volume 2, Chapter 20, Housing. [] H 1 AFFORDABLE HOUSING Goal: Provide sufficient housing for the current and future population that is appropriate, safe, and affordable for all income levels. Policies H 1.1 Regional Coordination Coordinate the city's comprehensive planning with other jurisdictions in the region to address housing- related needs and issues. Discussion: A sample of the reoccurring issues includes the lack of three bedroom and larger rental units for low- income households, the regional distribution of housing units available for lower- income households, and regional housing affordability. H 1.2 Regional Fair Share Housing Participate in a process that monitors and adjusts the distribution of low - income housing throughout the region. Discussion: A reoccurring issue that needs to be addressed within the greater Spokane region is the distribution of affordable housing for all income groups. Areas that continue to accommodate large shares of the low- income housing market have higher demands to satisfy social health and service needs. A regional process that periodically monitors progress toward achieving the region's housing goals and makes adjustments to policy, programs, and land use plans helps bring about the desired distribution of housing cost diversity. H 1.3 Employer- Sponsored Housing Provide incentives for employers to sponsor or develop affordable housing in proximity to their place of employment. Discussion: Providing incentives for employers who desire to help their employees by providing housing that is near the place of employment has many community benefits. Housing should be available near employment areas in order to provide transportation options, to increase accessibility to employment for those most in need and least able to afford personal vehicle transportation, and to create shorter trips. H 1.4 Use of Existing Infrastructure Direct new residential development into areas where community and human public services and facilities are available and in a manner that is compatible with other Comprehensive Plan elements. Discussion: Using existing services and infrastructure often reduces the cost of creating new housing. New construction that takes advantage of existing services and infrastructure conserves public resources that can then be redirected to other needs such as adding amenities to these projects. 8 Housing H 1.5 Housing Information Participate in and promote the development of educational resources and programs that assist low and moderate- income households in obtaining affordable and appropriate housing. Discussion: A lack of knowledge about how to obtain housing and home financing is often an impediment to finding appropriate housing. A place such as a resource center where financing assistance is available and home purchasing techniques are taught, can help households find suitable housing. H 1.6 Fair Housing Promote compliance with fair housing laws. Discussion: It is important to provide information to the general public about their rights and obligations under the fair housing laws and the grievance procedures available in case of violation. The city should document and forward violations of state and federal civil rights laws related to housing to the appropriate authorities. H 1.7 Socioeconomic Integration Promote socioeconomic integration throughout the city. Discussion: Socioeconomic integration includes people of all race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, disability, economic status, familial status, age, sexual orientation, or other arbitrary factors. Often, housing affordability, acts as a barrier to integration of all socioeconomic groups throughout the community. H 1.8 Affordable Housing Requirement Include a percentage of affordable housing within all new developments that include housing. Discussion: Requiring that lower- income housing be incorporated in every new housing development helps reverse the economic segregation trends within the city. This has the positive effect of integrating households of varying incomes. A greater variety of housing styles and density should be allowed to accommodate the housing units required. Housing types such as smaller homes on lots smaller than 5,000 square feet or small (four unit/two -story) townhouse structures should be allowed to accommodate this requirement. This housing should be priced so that it is available to households that earn around eighty percent of the countywide median household income. H 1.9 Low- Income. Housing Development Support and assist the public and private sectors in developing low- income or subsidized housing for households that cannot compete in the market for housing by using federal, state, and local aid. Discussion: Few new housing units are developed that are affordable to low- income households. Incentives are needed to lower or subsidize the cost of developing new housing for low - income households. Local incentives may include density bonuses, fee exemptions, priority permit processing, property tax deferral, increased options in housing types, and inclusionary zoning requirements. Comprehensive Plan 9 Last Revisions Effective 1 -17 -07 H 1.10 Low - Income Housing Funding Sources Support the development of low- income housing development funding sources. Discussion: Low - income housing development funding sources may include but are not limited to a community land trust, trust fund, mortgage revenue bonds, levies, or low - income tax credits. H 1.11 Siting of Subsidized Low - Income Housing Set clear site selection criteria for public housing to minimize geographic concentrations ofpublic housing projects in neighbor- hoods with a high percent of minority or low- income households. Discussion: Existing trends indicate that special need households and minority populations have been increasingly concentrated within low - income areas. New public housing should not continue this pattern of economic segregation. H 1.12 Permitting Process Permitting and development processes should be streamlined, simple, and efficient. Discussion: All permitting and development procedures should be scheduled for periodic evaluation to assess their effectiveness. The review processes need to protect public.health, safety and welfare. H 1.13 Building, Fire, Infrastructure, and Land Use Standards Review periodically and, when needed, revise building, fire, infrastructure, and land use standards and requirements to ensure community standards are implemented and that new or rehabilitated housing remains affordable. H 1.14 Performance Standards Discussion: Technology and community values are two examples of the many items that can change rapidly over time. City standards need to be reviewed periodically to ensure that they are efficient, cost effective, reflect current technology, and maintain the goal of affordable housing. Infrastructure standards, such as those for residential streets, need to be evaluated against changing values and needs so that they reflect current desires while also keeping housing affordable. Create a process to review proposed development practices that try to achieve the same results as existing development standards but that are currently not allowed. Discussion: Often several ways of achieving a standard exist. Health and safety concerns must be preserved but flexibility in how to achieve the desired standard is needed. A review process should be available to address a proposed development practice that is different from the existing development standards. When the proposed development practice is demonstrated to achieve the same ends as those prescribed in the existing development standards, the procedure should be approved. Different methods should be allowed when the results of the development practice achieve identical results in comparison to the prescribed standards. In many cases, allowing alternative development methods to be used can reduce development costs. H 1.15 New Manufactured Housing Permit manufactured homes on individual lots in all areas where residential uses are allowed. 10 Housing Discussion: Courts have ruled against discriminatory ordinances, which have restricted the location of Uniform Building Code compliant manufactured housing. Manufactured housing cannot be regulated differently than on -site built housing. H 1.16 Partnerships to Increase Housing Opportunities Create partnerships with public and private lending institutions to find solutions that increase opportunities and reduce financial barriers for builders and consumers of affordable lower- income housing. Discussion: The city should participate as a member or help facilitate partnerships that work toward the development of solutions to affordable housing problems. This may include working with institutions such as the Washington State Housing Financial Commission, financial institutions, and underwriters of development loans and mortgages to find ways to improve the financing process for the development of affordable lower - income housing. H 2 HOUSING CHOICE AND DIVERSITY Goal: Increase the number of housing alternatives within all areas of the city to help meet the changing needs and preferences of a diverse population. Policies H 2.1 Distribution of Housing Options Promote a wide range of housing types and housing diversity to meet the needs of the diverse population and ensure that this housing is available throughout the community for people of all income levels and special needs. Discussion: A variety of housing types should be available in each neighborhood. The variety of housing types should not concentrate or isolate lower - income and special needs households. Diversity includes styles, types, and cost of housing. q Many different housing forms can exist in an area and still 44 AM exhibit an aesthetic continuity. In many cases, neighborhood -based design guidelines will be available to guide the design of the housing forms. Allowing a wide range of housing types throughout the city provides the opportunity for increased socioeconomic integration. Housing standards that will be allowed throughout the city include small single - family lot sizes (under 5,000 square feet), manufactured housing on single- family lots, townhouses, condominiums, clustering, and other options that increase the supply of affordable home ownership opportunities. H 2.2 Senior Housing Encourage developments that provide a variety of housing options. so that seniors may stay within their neighborhoods. Discussion: Accessory dwelling units, condominiums, and existing home conversions within centers are examples of other arrangements that reduce maintenance worries and increase access to services. Comprehensive Plan 11 Last Revisions Effective 1 -17 -07 H 2.3 Accessory Dwelling Units Allow one accessory dwelling unit as an ancillary use to single - family owner - occupied homes in all designated residential areas as an affordable housing option. Discussion: Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) increase the amount and variety of available- affordable housing. ADUs increase the housing stock and living options within neighborhoods in a manner } that is less intensive than alternatives. Increasing the mix of housing helps to satisfy changing family needs and the trend of smaller households. They help provide an avenue for seniors, single parents, and families with grown children to remain in their homes and neighborhoods while obtaining extra income, security, companionship and services. Often ADUs allow a more efficient use of existing housing and infrastructure. Accessory dwelling units should be built in a manner that does not adversely affect the neighbor- hood. They should be designed to be physically and visually compatible with surrounding structures. In order to ensure management of the additional dwelling is to community standards one of the dwelling units on the lot must be owner - occupied. Further, in order to maintain a compatible living environment equivalent to surrounding dwellings ADUs shall provide living facilities and space at least equivalent to a studio apartment including a private kitchen, bath and sleeping area. A common type of accessory dwelling units includes a second dwelling unit created by converting existing space; such as an attached garage or daylight basement, in the primary residence. Detached ADUs above garages and along alleys promote increased supervision, public safety and pride of ownership of rear yard and alley environments. Detached ADUs above garages have the added benefit of adding to the variety of the housing stock while not increasing overall site coverage. Detached ADUs above garages and along alleys may be allowed in areas where specific ADU design guidelines have been adopted by the city. These design guidelines shall ensure that new ADUs are compatible with the existing neighborhood. H 2.4 Development of Single -Room Occupancy Housing Allow development ofsingle -room occupancy units in downtown Spokane and in other areas where high - density housing is permitted. Discussion: Single -room occupancy (SRO) housing contains units for occupancy by one person. These units may contain food preparation, sanitary facilities, or both. Due to their small size, SRO units are less expensive to rent than regular apartments, so they often serve as the only affordable housing option for many low- income individuals and homeless persons. Maintaining and increasing the supply of SRO housing is an important part of the future low- income housing market. H 2.5 Special Needs Housing Encourage the retention, inclusion, and development of special needs and assisted living housing. Discussion: Both the Growth Management Act and Countywide Planning Policies require that essential public facilities be fairly and equitably distributed. This applies within jurisdictions, as well as between neighboring jurisdictions. The City of Spokane's Consolidated Community Development and Housing Plan housing needs assessment finds that the physically disabled, developmentally disabled, and chronically mentally ill populations are in great need of affordable and subsidized housing located throughout the community. This policy does not apply to criminal or prerelease transitional housing. 12 Housing or H 2.6 Distribution of Special Needs Housing Include units that are affordable for low- income special need families in all housing developments. Discussion: Adequate housing for special needs populations is in very short supply. The new units required within housing developments help fill this need while also helping distribute the supply of special needs housing throughout the community. H 2.7 Taxes and Tax Structure Support state consideration ofproperty tax reform measures that provide increased local options that contribute to housing choice and diversity. Discussion: Other methods of taxing land have shown different effects on the long -term use of land. Local options for property taxation methods furnish increased tools to guide the health and development of the region. Providing tax relief for low- income housing improvements is one way to encourage community revitalization. Tax increment financing is also a tool for housing improvement in target areas. Taxing land based upon the current use of residential property rather than taxing land on the basis of the highest and best use can help preserve lower - income housing. Developing a tax structure that does not hinder home and land improvements will encourage community revitalization. H 3 HOUSING QUALITY Goal: Improve the overall quality of the City of Spokane's housing. Policies H 3.1 Housing Rehabilitation Provide assistance for housing rehabilitation beyond housing maintenance code requirements if the assistance is supportive of general community development activity and is on a voluntary basis. Discussion: Codes and standards that allow for "as safe as" or "equal to" conditions when affordable housing development or rehabilitation is involved improves the level of safety while keeping the structure redevelopment cost down. H 3.2 Property Responsibility and Maintenance Assist in and promote improved and increased public and private property maintenance and property responsibility throughout the city. Discussion: Recognition of "good" property owners can help set the standard for others to follow. The city should lead by example and maintain its property at least at the community standard. Additionally, the city should continue to support and fund the repair and rehabilitation of single - family and multifamily housing using federal, state, and local funding sources. Emergency code compliance loans are another method of maintaining standards. When other methods of maintaining minimum community standards fail, a strong code enforcement program is needed to protect surrounding property owners. Enforcement of city codes should not depend solely on complaints filed by neighbors but should be driven by the city's awareness of a violation. Comprehensive Plan 13 Last Revisions Effective 1 -17 -07 H 3.3 Housing Preservation Encourage preservation of viable housing. Discussion: Housing that is susceptible to redevelopment is often serving lower- income households and is an important part of the housing mix within the city. Future sub -area plans shall preserve existing viable housing outside of designated center or corridor environments where redevelopment and intensification are encouraged. Often the housing that is destroyed cannot be replaced by new housing elsewhere at the same cost level. Sub -area plans should permit the transfer of unused development rights from low - income housing to eligible sites elsewhere in the planning area or the city as a preservation strategy. Available housing programs and funds should be used to preserve viable housing that is susceptible to redevelopment or gentrification. Nonprofit housing organizations, land trusts and tenants should be encouraged to acquire and preserve viable low- income housing. Tax incentive options if made available by the state government, such as current use taxation would further encourage the preservation of viable housing. Finally, information about soon- to -be- demolished housing should be made available to the public, such as on the internet, so that concerned housing - related groups can determine if there are alternatives to demolition when the structure is worth preserving. Options might include purchase of the property or relocation of the housing. H 3.4 Linking Housing With Other Land Uses Ensure land use plans provide increased physical connection between housing, employment, recreation, daily -needs services, and educational uses. Discussion: The location of housing in relation to other land uses is a part of what determines the quality of housing. The desirability and viability of housing changes for different segments of the community, based on an area's mix of land uses. As complementary land uses become spread further apart, transportation options decrease while transportation costs increase. These added transportation costs reduce the amount of household income available for housing and other household needs. This affects lower - income households first.. In urban areas, basic services, such as grocery stores, public transportation, and public parks, should be available within a mile walk of all housing. H 3.5 Housing Goal Monitoring Provide a report annually to the City Plan Commission that monitors progress toward achieving the housing goals and includes recommended policy change if positive direction toward achieving the housing goals is not occurring. Discussion: Using readily available datasets as a basis for a simple set of indicators can highlight what is happening within the larger system. This process should provide assistance in determining what actions are needed to implement the goals and policies and whether revisions to the policies are needed. The public can provide feedback about the indicators that are most important to them. 14 Housing AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE HOMEFINDERS STATUS REPORTS COMNLERCIAL BUILDING NEW MADISON BUILDING OTIS HOTEL BRIEFING PAPER City of Spokane Crisis Relocation Team Assisting Low Income Tenants Facing Relocation September 4, 2007 To address the needs of the low - income tenants facing relocation from the Commercial Building and the New Madison Apartments, a group of non - profit agencies formed a "Crisis Relocation Team". The team consisted of professional case managers experienced in working with homeless, low- income, disabled, chemically addicted, and repeat offenders. The agencies involved in the Crisis Relocation Team are as follows: SNAP; Spokane Mental Health /Homeless Outreach Team; Catholic Charities /House of Charity and St. Margaret's; Lutheran Community Services, Spokane County Supportive Living Program; VOA; Transitions and VOICES. Background The redevelopment of the Commercial Building and the New Madison resulted in the tenants being asked to vacate their apartments by the middle of July. There were 45 tenants at the Commercial Building and approximately 60 tenants at the New Madison. The Spokane Homeless Coalition and VOICES brought together non - profit agencies to find out each of the tenant's collective obstacles to permanent housing and to compile their demographics. SLIHC (Spokane Low Income Housing Consortium) brought together the above - mentioned non - profit agencies, the building tenants, Northeast Washington Housing Solutions and property managers, i.e. SHV (Spokane Housing Ventures) and Kiemle & Hagood; and as a result of these meetings the Crisis Relocation Team was formed. The initial coordination of the Crisis Relocation Team happened within one week's time. These Case Managers met at the Commercial Building and the New Madison a minimum of three times a week until each tenant had been relocated, or at least their relocation issues were addressed. Impact Examples of how the tenants at the Commercial Building and the New Madison were served are as follows: rents, security deposits and utility deposits were paid, as well as application fees and some gas costs; tenants were assisted with moving via actual physical labor and /or transportation. There were numerous referrals to agencies in the community to provide advocacy, counseling and other needed services. At least 63 tenants were helped financially, and that number is currently growing. The relocation of the tenants from the two above - mentioned buildings is completed. However, not without some challenges; some refused help, some tenants left before the Crisis Relocation Team was formed, so it is difficult to track them to offer assistance. Some tenants went to live with friends or family, so did not transition to permanent housing. Many did receive assistance though, and were very grateful. Lessons Learned New endeavors have built -in learning curves. The Crisis Relocation Team's experience is no exception. In looking back on what worked well and what the team would recommend should this model be used again, the team identified the following as a "wish list" for future efforts: ■ more time to help the tenants prepare for the move ■ more funding ■ more social service agencies involved ■ a check -list for tenants educating them regarding what is needed when looking for permanent housing • more time to give emotional support to the tenants ■ a method in place to follow -up with each tenant after the move The team also identified the following a key to the success of the effort: • the ability to offer financial resources to tenants • a leader was in place to organize lists of tenants in each building ensuring no tenants were overlooked • there was a central person who helped organize information for the dispersing of deposits and other related assistance • there was on -site delegation, and consistency • the tenants knew where and when to find the Case Managers Resources Cash resources to this effort included the initial $10,000 and subsequent $250,000 from the City of Spokane as well as $10,000 and numerous rental application fees from RenCorp. The Department of Housing and Urban Development / Northeast Washington Housing Solutions provided 45 Section 8 Vouchers for rental assistance. Spokane Low Income Housing Consortium, Spokane Housing Ventures and Kiemle & Hagood, VOICES, Catholic Charities, SNAP, Volunteers of America, Spokane County, the City of Spokane, the Homeless Coalition, Spokane Mental Health, Lutheran Community Services, Northeast Washington Housing Solutions as well as others all participated in the collective planning around this effort. Crisis Relocation Team Agencies: The team held multiple planning meetings prior to the actual implementation of the team. Once the team was in place, they spent a minimum of ten hours a week (each) working with the tenants over a three -month period. While it is difficult to quantify this effort, the estimated value of in -kind staffing by the agencies providing case managers to staff the team, is $50,000. Prepared by Susan King Homeless /Housing Assistant Human Services Department September, 2007 2 r agc 1 vi i Marty Dickinson From: King, Susan [sking @spokanecity.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 9:18 AM To: Trautman, Paul Cc: Allard, Jerrie; Brum, Teresa Subject: Friday's HomeFinder's meeting Attachments: 10 -19 -07 HomeFinder's Meeting.doc Dear Paul, Here are the minutes from Friday's meeting. There have been some changes since then though. There are about 20 people left in the building according to Bob Peeler. Some more tenants have agreed to Assisted Living and /or Skilled Nursing Facilities, so the numbers are very fluid. Bob Peeler is a very good source for information. His cell # is 993 -1803. Chris and Bob went door -to -door on Friday, so he can fill you in on that process. Hope this is helpful, Paul. Thanks. Sincerely, Susan E. King Homeless/Housing Assistant Human Services Department City of Spokane 808 W. Spokane Falls Blvd. Spokane, WA 99201 (509) 625 -6056 skin gaspokanecity.org 10/23/2007 HomeFinder's Meeting 10/19/07 City of Spokane In Attendance: Timm Ormsby, Rex Olson, Joele Hodgson, Bob Peeler, Ray Rieckers, Dave Bilsland, Sheila Morley, Dan Ruddell City of Spokane: Joe Shogan, Jerrie Allard, Susan King Agenda: Who's left? What's the plan? Who's doing what next week? Wrap up — what's next? Letters went out to the 9 tenants that had little or no contact with the HomeFinder's Team. Two of the tenants are meeting with the HomeFinder's Team, three of those nine are out of the building and 4 tenants are still a mystery to the HomeFinder's Team. Chris Batten and Bob Peeler will be entering those rooms today, since 48 hour notice was given two days ago. Five tenants have vouchers through SHA dba as NEWHS, and that process can take from 30 -45 days. Jerrie Allard will contact Steve Cervantes regarding expediting the process. Costs being incurred are $1200 cap per tenant and anything going over that amount is run by Jerrie Allard. Transitional housing and motel costs are to be expected. The 12 pending moves are in the process, 9 are out and 3 are coordinating with moving companies. Some of these costs are bumping up against the $1200 cap. Some tenants are concerned about services in the building being discontinued such as the vending machines, laundry facilities and the elevator. Dan Ruddell from DSHS said that 4 out of the 6 referrals to APS refused services and have no local direct case management. Joele Hodgson from Spokane Mental Health/Homeless Outreach Team said that SMH will be assisting to try and engage those tenants and help coordinate them with appropriate services before the Sheriff or being hospitalized comes into play. Bob Peeler mentioned that when the time comes, those 4 vulnerable people who have refused services can go to a motel. The 4 households with a plan status is that 1 tenant is going to Phoenix, AZ, another has a plan and two of the apartments have couples in them and their plans fell through. Bob P. said some of the tenants have moved into higher quality housing and others may be homeless again in 6 months. Councilman Shogan recapped and said it sounds like there are still tenants in 25 units. Eleven of those have no vital plan yet and 4 of those 1 I will hopefully be assisted by SMH. Ray Rieckers. said that 315 letters went out recruiting support and $1200 has come in, and that is a big help. Ray would like to see that money go to VOA and Catholic Charities who have done so much hard work. Bob P. is sending Chris B. updates regularly. Joele H. asked about plans for when this happened in our community again, and was told of the work being done to have an Ordinance in place. Dan Ruddell said that the Level of Care should be done first by Home and Community Services and/or the RSN. Jerrie A. mentioned that VOICES had done an informal assessment with the other buildings that have closed. Ray R. suggested in the future that there be communication with the landlord, a 48 hr. notice given and then an Assessment set up. Joe S. said this is procedure for social service agencies not an Ordinance issue. Jerrie Allard asked who would contact the Center for Justice. They need to be told about the 4 severely disabled that are subject to eviction and need legal representation. Ray R. thinks Chris B. will serve Eviction notices today to those not actively trying to move. Next HomeFinder's meeting will be Friday, November 2nd at City of Spokane. Homeseekers report of Activities, July through October 1. Commercial Building Relocation Activities Number of Tenants Assisted' 19 Items Most Covered Rent and/or deposits Total Spent Utility deposits $8,274.00 Average $ Spent per Unit3 435.47 New Madison Relocation Activities Number of Tenants Assisted Items Most Covered 20 Rent and/or deposit Utility deposit Total Spent $11,841.73 Approx. $6,500 RenCorp Approx. $5,350 City Relo Average Spent per Unit $592.09 Three residents (former employees of RenCorp) still need to be relocated. Otis Relocation Activities Number of Tenants Assisted Items Most Covered 15 moved and out of building Applications 2 pending the Spokane Movers Rent and/or Deposits Utility deposits Total Spent $9,293.76 Average Spent per Unit $546.69 to -date (includes expenditure for applications tees only; expenses will increase per unit as rent and deposits are paid) 1. NEWHS provided vouchers and support to assist the majority of residents to relocate. 2. Due to notification and availability of relocation team many tenants had moved before relocation efforts began. 3. These are averages primarily spent on single person households with extremely low incomes. Averages will increase if notification and household size are increased Ages: Profile of Otis Residents To Date: October 1, 2007 56 surveys 1 -29: 1 (28 years old) 30- 39: 4 40- 49: 17 50 -59: 20 60- 69: 7 70- 79: 6 80 +: 1 (82 years -old) Average Age: 52 years -old Income: GAU /GAX: 10 Earn Income: 10 SSI, SSA, SSD: 30 VA: 6 Pension: 1 No Income head of hous( ($339 per month) (Average income: $825.40) (Average income: $594.166) (Average income: $691.33) ($610 per month) :hold: 2 * Income for a household may be from more than one source Average Income: $641.00 Lenath of Sta 0 -11 months: 10 1 -3 years: 14 3 -5 years: 7 5 -9 years: 11 10 -19 years: 5 20+ years: 5 Average Length of Stay: about 9 years *Some surveys and intakes did not have length of stay filled out Disability: Mental: 25 Physical: 40 Drug and Alcohol: 3 *Only 6 people did not declare a disability; 3 of those were hotel staff Felony: Self Declared Felony: 10 (non sex - offence) Sex offender: 10 *2 people reported having both types of felony, Veterans: 18 total RECEIVED a OCT 7 2 2007 y CITY CLERK'S OFFICE •-". /�) V� _ �J �% SPOKANE. WA r� 7 - _ tA4 (17 e -7, s r�Q a 4�f l o- Div 4�y �.. 7�,,°� -� a� °S� °'�G 0\-,4-0 13� cAD vv�a 4N��P- a �.•DSZs . �'! � ARCHITECTURE ■ BROKEREAGE ■ CONSTRUCTION a DEVELOPMENT 'o: The 2163 Task force ,ttention: Christina McCabe B��YaT(T (i Tllp p9l RoCorp eL�nrNG THL fU. Re: Temporary transitional housing for The Otis Christina, 7/18/2007 As requested please find below our outline of what we have agreed to do should we close the transaction to purchase the Otis as we intend to do. Over the course of the past few months several things have become apparent to us as we have discussed how best to work towards relocating the current residents out of the Otis. The current residents will have a much more difficult time in finding suitable housing options due to the barriers that they must overcome, including but not limited to income, criminal background and their respective disabilities. No amount of money will fully overcome this difficult reality. We also recognize that the current system has been and continues to be overwhelmed. What we have proposed is to put the Otis in a temporary holding pattern which will allow the residents the time necessary to find replacement housing. The primary reason that we believe that this will be effective is due to the commitment on the part of Catholic Charities to provide a full time, onsite case manager. This will allow the tenants to be "case managed" out of the building over an extended period of time. Doing this will result in a majority of the tenants being able to determine what resources they may have while working with a case manager who can assist them in the process. Our initial thought was that either the City or some other qualified social services agency would take on this challenge manage the building and find the necessary resources to cover the continuing operational losses of the building. As it is the building is loosing in excess of $30,000 per month. If we assume a declining rental income as the tenants are placed this number will increase quickly, where as the operating expenses would expect to stay at or about the same. From the onset we have committed $50,000 towards assisting in this operational loss. When it was apparent that no other group or agency was either willing or able to take on the challenge of managing the building we, against our better judgment agreed to do so. The question of how to deal with the operating losses continued to be a major point of discussions with the City. RenCorp LLC 114 West Pacific Avenue Spokane WA 99201 509.455.3770 Fax 509.455.3771 ARCHITECTURE ■ BROKEREAGE ■ CONSTRUCTION ■ DEVELOPMENT P�'��.Y pitr'fi TqP P,t.p RenCorp OFyPLU PfMG iHB PViJ�G The City has suggested that we as the owner carry the entire debt of the building and share equally (50 %) in the cost of covering the operating losses. For reasons that we hope are obvious we are unwilling to take on this level of financial commitment. We have however agreed to carry those costs which one may argue we would have should the building simply remain vacant during the pre - development period. It must be clear that we do not subscribe to this argument in any fashion and believe that any assumptions in this regard are out of line with reality. That being said we have agreed to the following carrying costs, debt service on the building, taxes and the insurance we would have otherwise paid should the building be vacant, approximately $128,000 during the 7 month transitional period. It is anticipated that during this reduced period of time, from 9 months to 7 that the operating losses will be at or near $390,000 (including debt). This may be less but will not be more as we have agreed to "back stop" any additional loses. We would need to agree as to the level of service in order to either reduce the budget or keep within our means. It is also possible that this expense may be further reduced by bringing in other "partners" to the process. With our commitment of $128,000, we propose that the balance be divided between 2163 funds and the funds which City Council has allocated towards the relocation process. Any reduction in the operating expenses would be prorated back to the "partners" equally. While it was obvious to us that the City felt that we needed to be equal "partners" in this process, we are still only able to commit $50,000 towards our willingness to meet this demand. To bridge this gap we would propose a no interest loan for a period of 24 months, which would be forgiven if (when) we commit to and build 7 new low to moderate income units. These units would provide housing within the CBD for low to moderate income tenants, 50% ANH - workforce housing. We would look to leverage this with our capital and any other resources available. At just slightly more than $10,000 per unit this would represent the most efficient way of leveraging our resources, and creating new low income housing as we proceed. If interested we would be willing to commit another 5 units if the loan were extended to the entire $128,000. It has been suggested that we do this on a "month to month" basis, we are agreeable in the sense that if we commit to the process and after several months there are only those few remaining tenants who are unable to be placed in the system, are removed from the building. We are not willing to enter into an agreement that would leave us with a reduced occupancy heading into the winter months carrying the operating expenses on our own and faced with the predicament of vacating the building during the most difficult time of the year. This process must be seen to its logical conclusion which includes continual operation during the winter months. RenCorp LLC 114 West Pacific Avenue Spokane WA 99201 509.455.3770 Fax 509.455.3771 ARCHITECTURE ■ BROKEREAGE ■ CONSTRUCTION ■ DEVELOPMENT RenCorp w( o �. e�FLr�P /NG TH F. fV"13 In summary we purpose the following: • Use the Otis as a transitional facility for 7 months (Sep - March) • RenCorp to manage the building • Case manage the tenants into better, more suitable housing • The Developer pay 1/3 of the cost of holding the building open • Use City and 2163 funds to cover the remaining 2/3 of the costs • Work to reduce the expenses to only the most essential and necessary costs • Work to bring on additional "partners" to offset the costs • Create 7 -12 new low to moderate income units Again, we believe that this is the most sensitive, and sensible solution to a difficult situation_ Your time and consideration is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Christopher M. Batten, CCIM Designated Broker RenCorp Realty RenCorp LLC 114 West Pacific Avenue Spokane WA 99201 509.455.3770 Fax 509.455.3771 SPOKANE Human Services ^' . 808 W. Spokane Falls Blvd. ' Spokane, WA 99201 -3333 (509) 625 -6130 FAX (509) 625 -6777 E -Mail ) l akjones @spokanecity.org City of Spokane Homeless Management Information System Data JThis is the results from the New Madison Tenant Survey conducted on June 14, 2007. Thirty New Madison Residents had participated in the survey. Length of time at New Madison Length of Time Number of Residents Less than 1 year 9 1 Year 1 2 Years 5 3 Years 1 4 Years 1 5 Years 1 6 Years 0 7 Years 2 8 Years 3 9 Years 1 10 Years 0 11+ Years 5 *Longest length of stay is 22 Years. Representative or Protective Payee Ages Veterans Response Number of Residents Yes 6 No 24 Ages Number of Residents 18 -35 2 36 -54 16 55 -65 9 66 -70 1 70+ 2 Response Number of Residents Yes 13 No 17 New Madison Tenant Survey Prepared by the City of Spokane Human Services Department Amy Jones — akjones @spokanecity.org June 18, 2007 Transportation Response Number of Residents f Yes 11 No 19 Type of Transportation Type of Transportation Number of Residents Bus 4 Bus Pass 3 Car 3 Friend 1 Walk 2 Chore worker 1 Felony Record Response Number of Residents Yes 7 No 23 Type of Felony Type of Felony Number of Residents Sex Offender 2 Assault 1 Arson 0 Drug Manufacturing/Delivery 2 Other 1 Drug Possession I Eviction History Response Number of Residents Yes 2 No 28 *Of the 2 responses, 1 was for misdemeanors, and the other resident was transferred when the Merlin closed. Landlord /Utilities past due Response Number of Residents Yes 4 No 26 New Madison Tenant Survey Prepared by the City of Spokane Human Services Department 3 Amy Jones — akjones @spokanecity.org June 18, 2007 New Madison Tenant Survey Prepared by the City of Spokane Human Services Department Amy Jones — akjones @spokanecity.org June I S, 2007 Apt # NEW MADISON TENANT SURVEY Name 1. How long have you lived at the New Madison? 2. Do you have a representative or protective payee? (Circle) Yes No 3. What is your age? Birthday? 4. Are you a Veteran? (Circle) Yes No 5. What is your household size? 6. What is your monthly income? 7. What is the source of your monthly income (Circle all that apply) .GAU GAX SSI SSD Earned TANF Pension Native per Capita Other 8. Do you have current, valid picture identification? (Circle) Yes No 9. What assistance do you need to move? (Circle all that apply) Help gaining Identification Money for Deposit Truck to move belongings Letter from Doctor verifying service /therapy pet Application fees Other 10. Do you have transportation? (Circle) Yes No what type? 11. Do you have a felony record? (Circle) Yes No Date/Year of Conviction Offense (Circle) Sex Offender Assault Arson Drug Manufacturing and/or Delivery Other 12. Besides now, have you ever been evicted? (Circle) Yes No If yes, what happened and when did it happen? 13. Do you owe a landlord or electric /gas company money? (circle) Yes No How much 14. Do you have a case manager? (Circle) Yes No If yes, what agency is your case manager with? When was the last time you saw your case manager? 15. Do you have a disability? (Circle) Yes No If yes (Circle all that apply) Mental Health Drug/Alcohol Physical Service /Therapy Animal (with prescription) Wheelchair Developmental Mobility/Wheelchair 16. Do you need special accommodations? (Circle) Yes No If yes, what accommodations? 17. Are you receiving needed services for this disability? (Circle) Yes No 18. Do you have a pet? (Circle) Yes No If yes, what type How many? 19. Do you have a cell phone? (Circle) Yes No 20. Do you have Community, Voice Mail? (Circle) Yes No Name Address Phone Number Other Contact Information Y BRIEFING PAPER City of Spokane Crisis Relocation Team Assisting Low Income Tenants Facing Relocation September 4, 2007 To address the needs of the low- income tenants facing relocation from the Commercial Building and the New Madison Apartments, a group of non - profit agencies formed a "Crisis Relocation Team ". The team.consisted of professional case managers experienced in working with homeless, low- income, disabled, chemically addicted, and repeat offenders. The agencies involved in the Crisis Relocation Team are as follows: SNAP; Spokane Mental Health /Homeless Outreach Team; Catholic Charities /House of Charity and St. Margaret's; Lutheran Community Services, Spokane County Supportive Living Program; VOA; Transitions and VOICES. Background The redevelopment of the Commercial Building and the New Madison resulted in the tenants being asked to vacate their apartments by the middle of July. There were 45 tenants at the Commercial Building and approximately 60 tenants at the New Madison. The Spokane Homeless Coalition and VOICES brought together non - profit agencies to find out each of the tenant's collective obstacles to permanent housing and to compile their demographics. SLIHC (Spokane Low Income Housing Consortium) brought together the above - mentioned non - profit agencies; the building tenants, Northeast Washington Housing Solutions and property managers, i.e. SHV (Spokane Housing Ventures) and Kiemle & Hagood; and as a result of these meetings the Crisis Relocation Team was formed. The initial coordination of the Crisis Relocation Team happened within one week's time. These Case Managers met at the Commercial Building and the New Madison a minimum of three times a week until each tenant had been relocated, or at least their relocation issues were addressed. Impact Examples of how the tenants at the Commercial Building and the New Madison were served are as follows: rents, security deposits and utility deposits were paid, as well as application fees and some gas costs; tenants were assisted with moving via actual physical labor and /or transportation. There were numerous referrals to agencies in the community to provide advocacy, counseling and other needed services. At least 63 tenants were helped financially, and that number is currently growing. The relocation of the tenants from the two above - mentioned buildings is completed. However, not without some challenges; some refused help, some tenants left before the Crisis Relocation Team was formed, so it is difficult to track them to offer assistance. Some tenants went to live with friends or family, so did not transition to permanent housing. Many did receive assistance though, and were very grateful. Lessons Learned New endeavors have built -in learning curves. The Crisis Relocation Team's experience is no exception. In looking back on what worked well and what the team would recommend should this model be used again, the team identified the following as a "wish list" for future efforts: • more time to help the tenants prepare for the move • more funding • more social service agencies involved • a check -list for tenants educating them regarding what is needed when looking for permanent housing • more time to give emotional support to the tenants • a method in place to follow -up with each tenant after the move The team also identified the following a key to the success of the effort: • the ability to offer financial resources to tenants • a leader was in place to organize lists of tenants in each building ensuring no tenants were overlooked • there was a central person who helped organize information for the dispersing of deposits and other related assistance • there was on -site delegation, and consistency • the tenants knew where and when to find the Case Managers Resources Cash resources to this effort included the initial $10,000 and subsequent $250,000 from the City of Spokane as well as $10,000 and numerous rental application fees from RenCorp. The Department of Housing and Urban Development / Northeast Washington Housing Solutions provided 45 Section 8 Vouchers for rental assistance. Spokane Low Income Housing Consortium, Spokane Housing Ventures and Kiemle & Hagood, VOICES, Catholic Charities, SNAP, Volunteers of America, Spokane County, the City of Spokane, the Homeless Coalition, Spokane Mental Health, Lutheran Community Services, Northeast Washington Housing Solutions as well as others all participated in the collective planning around this effort. Crisis Relocation Team Agencies: The team held multiple planning meetings prior to the actual implementation of the team. Once the team was in place, they spent a minimum of ten hours a week (each) working with the tenants over a three -month period. While it is difficult to quantify this effort, the estimated value of in -kind staffing by the agencies providing case managers to staff the team, is $50,000. Prepared by Susan King Homeless /Housing Assistant Human Services Department September, 2007 2 u MEMORANDUM Date: July 20, 2007 To: Marty Dickinson, Downtown Spokane Partnership Alan Smelzer, City of Spokane From: Christine Barada, Director, Community Services Department and Housing and Community Development Department Subject: City of Spokane Task Force Recommendations I. Legislative 1. Review existing Property Tax Exemption incentives to deal with lower- income and difficult to accommodate households in determining an eligibility to participate in the program. Consider increasing the eligible area's for multi- family property tax incentives. 2. Develop and adopt Relocation and Displacement policies as part of the jurisdictions comprehensive plan that targets very low and extremely low- income residents. Research the number of metropolitan cities that have developed policies that guide re- development and affordable housing efforts —they are not always mutually exclusive of one another to use as a model. 3. Appoint a sub - committee of the task force to review and make recommendations on the City's "Affordable Housing and Economic Development Elements" that will increase the inventory of and preserve existing affordable housing downtown. This may also include establishing affordable housing goals for the city, as much as economic development achievements. 4. Include staff planning and reporting to elected officials and citizens on the city's progress in meeting annual goals. II. Institutional Work with the City and County Public Housing Agency while providing the agency with resources and assistance in establishing city and county policies regarding allocation of federal housing assistance and services. This should be made a high priority of the city, county and city of Spokane Valley in appointing the agency's Board of Commissioners in undertaking these policies. The city and county community development departments have a long history of working together on local affordable housing issues, including planning, HUD /state affordable housing programs and in keeping properties in compliance with federal, state, local requirements. Both departments regularly discuss affordable housing developments; policy; meet with the same affordable housing and for - profit developers, including service agencies and providers. Recommend that city departments such as human services and community development be encouraged to work with county community services and housing and community development on joint- affordable housing and public service efforts, as well as each other in meeting the city's housing and human service goals. City and County elected officials, including appropriate department level officials and staff should meet to discuss on -going programs, resources, plans, policy, and outcomes on a regular basis. AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE EMERGENCY HOUSING RELOCTION FUNDING October 25, 2007 RESOLUTION NO. A, A resolution regarding financial assistance for individuals displaced from residential housing in the downtown core. WHEREAS, recent events have caused or threaten to cause individuals living in the downtown core to be displaced from their housing; WHEREAS, the actual or potential displacement of downtown residents primarily affects lower income individuals who may not be able to find adequate housing, resulting in the individuals becoming homeless; WHEREAS, the displacement of a large number of individuals in the downtown core and the potential of the increase in the number of homeless will place an increased burden on other social service agencies; and WHEREAS, it is the City Council's intent to provide financial assistance through the City's Human Services Department to assist those individual with relocation cost. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council for the City of Spokane that the City of Spokane approves the allocation of $250,000 through an emergency budget ordinance from the City's unrestricted general fund reserve to the Human Services grants fund to be used for financial assistance to those individuals displaced from their residence in the downtown core including the Commercial Building, the New Madison Building and the Otis Hotel. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the financial assistance shall be administered through a local non -profit agency selected through a RFP process by the City's Human Services Department. The financial assistance shall be limited to pay for moving expenses, transitional housing expenses, security deposits, first and last months' rent, application fees, utility deposits and pet deposits. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON _ .2007. Approved as to form: Assistant City Attorney City Clerk rw �2007 -6)0 i6_ .sue A P ® i 7lVfiA5 u ,51 V -Al �D MEMORANDUM DATE: July 6, 2007 TO: John Pilcher CC: Joe Shogan, Theresa Sanders, Teresa Brum, Alan Smeltzer FROM: Jerrie Allard RE: Emergency Housing Relocation Fund Human Services 808 W Spokane Falls Blvd. Spokane, WA 99201 -3333 (509) 625 -6130 FAX (509) 625 -6777 E -Mail jallard@spokanecity.org As requested by Councilmember Stark, I have put together is a high -level summary and plan for the proposed Emergency Housing Relocation Fund. Councilmember Stark had asked that I work with Mr. Batten and the County on the plan however given the short time line and my being out of the office next week at a homeless conference, I did not have the time to do so. In addition to the plan, I've outlined some additional thoughts for your consideration as we continue to move through this process. am hopeful that with the establishment of the crisis relocation team of case managers, coupled with the increased financial resources, we will be able to secure housing for the majority of the individuals facing relocation. I am concerned however with the reality that not all tenants, regardless of financial resources, will be able to find housing. The urgent need is with the tenants of the New Madison facing a vacate date of July 15"'. I've heard estimates of up to 50 New Madison tenants will not be able to find housing by this date. Catholic Charities has convened two meetings to prepare for this possible scenario. I would suggest that Robb McCann, CEO of Catholic Charities, provide a briefing to the Mayor's task force regarding current contingency plans and progress. ■ The crisis relocation team of case managers has worked out a schedule to work directly with the tenants to assist them in their relocation efforts. Six non - profits are dedicating a portion of their staff time to the team for up to four weeks. They will be up and running in the lobby of the New Madison on Monday July 9ti'. If the need for a crisis team exists beyond the four weeks, we may need to work out other arrangements with the non - profits to keep the team active. I heard Mr. Batten at the study session comment that both SNAP and Catholic Charities support his proposal and that Catholic Charities has assured him they would be able relocate tenants of the Otis within 6 to 9 months. If the City is considering RenCorp's request for funding, I recommend a joint meeting with RenCorp, Catholic Charities and SNAP to ensure all promises and commitments are on the table and confirmed prior to making any commitment. ■ In regards to Mr. Batten's request that a portion of the funding for the Otis come from 2163 funds, I suggest our legal department review the state legislation to ensure that is an allowable use of these funds. I was told this morning that in order provide any state or federal funds for Mr. Batten's request, the Otis would have to meet minimum housing quality standards. I have not had time to confirm this statement. I also suggest engaging Representative Timm Ormsby in the discussion, as he was a co- author of the legislation. The following are my thoughts in regards to the pros and cons of Mr. Batten's proposal Pros ■ Allows for additional time to locate housing for displaced tenants • Leverage of Catholic Charities with their offer of a full time case manager to ' work with the Otis tenants on finding housing ■ Mr. Batten's offer of $50,000 to assist with relocation costs ■ With the additional time, likely more tenants will be able to secure housing Cons . ■ Postpones the inevitable ■ Questionable habitability of the Otis (suggest fire and health district inspection),. , • Mixing of vulnerable population with predatory population ■ Sets precedent for future requests ■ Investment for temporary solution ■ What are the legal implications? Liability of the City?. - SPOKANE ' 00 �1 ihili))11 Proposal for the Emergency Housing Relocation Fund Plan Human Services 808 W. Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA 99201 -3333 (509) 625 -6130 FAX (509) 625 -6777 E -Mail jallard@spokanecity.org Purpose of the Fund Dollars set aside for this fund will be used to provide one time emergency relocation assistance to low- income tenants currently residing within the downtown core and facing imminent displacement. The goal of this effort is to quickly find appropriate housing that can be sustained into the future for very low- income.people facing relocation, Background Over the past few months, Spokane has lost a number of low- income housing units located within the downtown core. We are currently working with multiple partners in developing a community plan /response to the need of the tenants of multifamily housing properties larger than 20 units located in the Downtown Core of Spokane who face imminent relocation needs. The majority of the tenants currently residing in these buildings are extremely low- income, with incomes ranging from $339.00 to $600.00. The tenant profile is everything from vulnerable citizens with significant physical and /or mental disabilities, to convicted felons, to level 3 sex offenders. Spokane is currently facing an extremely tight rental market for low- income units. The current vacancy rate for studio or one- bedroom units is running about. 2 percent. This tight market, coupled with the imminent loss of an estimated 200 additional low income units has created what some are referring to as a low income housing crisis. This crisis has created an overwhelming response from the social service community concerned with the welfare of the individuals being displaced. In addition to concern for these individuals, there is concern for public safety and public health should these individuals not be able to find suitable housing. Proposal Council President Shogan is proposing using $250,000 from the current $10 million city surplus to create an Emergency Housing Relocation Fund. The fund would be used to provide one -time financial assistance to help those facing relocation to overcome barriers such as first and last months rent, application fees, utility deposits, pet deposits, etc. Policy Considerations for City Council: • Any unexpended dollars at the end of the fiscal year would carry over to the next year • Expense exceeding $10,000 will require advance City Council approval • A cap of the amount of assistance per unit. Suggestions have ranged from $1,200 to $2,500 per unit. • Making these dollars available on a `match" basis, when available, with match coming from developers, agencies, other governments and individuals. • Encouragement of Spokane County and other agencies in this effort • This money would only be available on a reimbursement basis and available only after relocation on an individual occurs ... this relocation would be to a more permanent housing option (we have some reason to believe that certain agencies have some working capital available; this provides an incentive to facilitate the actual relocation) 3 ®m SPOKANE IT, 1 11 71) City of Spokane Media Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 31, 2007 Contact: .Jerrie Allard Human Services Director (509) 625 -6130 www.spokanecity.org APPLICANTS SOUGHT FOR HOMELESSNESS HOUSING ASSISTANCE ACT FUNDING FOR 2008 The City of Spokane Human Services Department, in partnership with Spokane County, the City of Spokane Valley and other regional jurisdictions, is pleased to announce - funding available through the Homeless Housing Assistance Act (2163). An estimated $700,000 in funds, generated through real estate document recording fees, is being made available through a Request for Proposals (RFP) process. Applications are due by 4:30 p.m. on Oct. 8 in the City's Human Services office on the sixth floor of City Hall, 808 W. Spokane Falls Blvd. The money will be distributed in 2008. A workshop to assist potential applicants with the process will be held on Friday, Sept. 7, at 10 a.m. in the City Council Chambers in the lower level of City Hall. The Homelessness Housing and Assistance Act (ESSHB 2163) applies a surcharge of $10 on each real estate transaction within Washington State. Each county collects the funds and sends 40 percent to the state and uses the other 60 percent locally toward reducing homelessness in their county. Funding generated through the Act supports activities that to the greatest extent possible further the goals, strategies and actions identified in the Spokane Regional 10 Year Plan to Address Homelessness. The plan, along with more detailed information on the Request for Proposals is available online at www.spokanehumanservices.org or, by contacting the human services department at 625 -6130. -30- DRAFT ONLY 2008 City of Spokane Human Services RFP Proposed Priorities In light of the recent crisis in affordable permanent housing the sub - committee proposes prioritization of the three categories of funding for this year's grant; the three areas are listed below in order of preference. 1) Priority: To move homeless families and individuals within the City of Spokane into stable living environments. Strategies (excludes capitol requests) to address this priority are listed .below in order of preference: 1. Affordable permanent housing. Proposals need not be limited to, but may include items such as unit rehab, repairs, operating and maintenance. 2. Transitional Housing 3. Homeless prevention services 4. Emergency Shelter 2) Priority: To improve physical and mental health for the citizens of the City of Spokane. Strategies to address this priority may include /but are not limited to the following (in no order of preference): Health Care, both physical and mental Prescription assistance Nutrition and hunger 3) Priority: To improve access to human services. Innovative methods that address gaps in services with the intent of moving individuals towards stability and /or economic self- sufficiency will be given preference. Strategies to address this priority may include /but are not limited to the following (in no order of preference): Information and referral Case management Supportive Services j , fr_y AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BASICS How Housing Vorks October 25, 2007 .te FEATURE ARTICLE Affordable Housing Basics by Melora Sharts and Allen Schmelzer• Community Development Department City.of Spokane . Housing is considered to be . "affordable" if the household: pays no more than 30% of its gross income for housing costs, which includes rent and basic utilities for renters and mortgage (principal, and interest), insurance, and' taxes for homeowners.. (Most mortgage lenders limit the payment of principal, interest, taxes and insurance to 28 -31% of household income.) While people may choose to pay more than 30 % of their income for housing, doing so is a ;burden for very low- income people -who have limited remaining funds to pay for necessities, such as food, health care, transportation; and child care. As income increases, a household has more discretionary income, which they may use for housing. In addition, tax considerations for higher income homeowners reduce the net -,cost of housing. In affordable housing. terminology, "low- income" typically refers to households at or below 80% of the.area median. income ( "AMI "). Homeownership programs often target households with incomes between 50% and 80 %. of AMI. "Very low- income" are households at or below 50% of AMI; which is typical for rental housing programs. Another tier is "extremely low- income ", which are households at or below 30% of AMI and includes people surviving on meager. retirement incomes, disability payments, 'or other assistance programs. Since these terms apply nationwide and there are areas with much higher housing costs relative to incomes than,Spokane, some programs, such as low- income housing tax credits and bond financing programs use additional tiers, such as 60% of AMI or 65 %. of AMI. There are different sources of income information that are typically cited. Most national housing, programs use the "area median income" published by the US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development ('THUD "). HUD uses various statistical sources (e.g., Census statistics, labor statistics) and updates annually. Table 1 shows HUD's 2007 Spokane Area Median Incomes, adjusted for family size. In 2007, the HUD area median - income for a family. . of four in Spokane. County is $57,600. The federal HOME and Community Development .Block Grant programs use the HUD area median incomes. Table 1 also shows the housing cost that would be affordable for each income level. Another source of income :statistics is the National Low Income Housing Coalition ( "NLIHC "), which uses information from the annual US Census American Community Survey. The 2006 NLIHC area median income (for a family of four) for the Spokane Metropolitan Statistical Area ( "MSA ") was $53,900. Both HUD and NLIHC refer to "median" incomes, which means half the households have incomes above that number and half below. Table 1. Spokane County 2007 Area Median Incomes (HUD) and Affordable Housing Cost (30% of Monthly Income) Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 Area Median $40,300 $46,100 $51,800 $57,600 $62,200 $66,800 Income 1 007 $1,152 $1,,295 _$1,440 $1,555 $1,670 Low - Income $32,250 $36,900 $41,500 $46,100 $49,800 $53,500 80% AMI $806 922 $1,037 $1,152 .$11245 $1,337 Very Low- $20,150 $23;050 $25,900 $28,800 $31,100 $33;450 Income $503 $576 $647 $720 $777 $835 50% AMI Extremely $12,1.00 $13,850 $15,500 $17,300 $18,700 $20,050 Low - Income ; $502 $346 $388 $432 $467 $501 30% -AMI Another income measure available from Washington State Employment Security Department is the mean (average) wage for people in various occupations. In March 2005, estimated employment for the Spokane MSA in all 'industries was 188,920 people with an average wage of $35,142. The, median wage was $29,034. This is'below the median household incomes explained above-as a household may have multiple wage earners. Table 2 shows typical occupations that have mean and median wages that would put a family of fourmith a single wage earner in the "very low income" category (at or below 50% of AMI)i Many of these occupations are also very low - income for two- and three- person households. The average income for all of the listed occupations would be considered "low- income" (at or below 800/b of AMI) for a single person household. Some people refer to housing for low wage working people to be "workforce housing ". The definition of workforce housing is fluid. The National Housing Conference defines workforce housing as housing for households with at least one full -time worker who earns between minimum wage and the amount needed to afford to live in the area. The Urban Land Institute puts the bottom end of the workforce housing bracket at 50% or 60% of AMI - the upper limit for many federal subsidies. Proposed legislation in Washington (SSB5404 and H131910) state: "Workforce Housing ", means housing for employed low and moderate income persons earning between 60% of AMI and 120% of AMI which promotes the ability of the employed person to live near their place of employment and reduces their commute time and expenses." Another widely used term is "fair market rents ", which are rents determined by HUD for local housing markets. They are updated annually and are used for various government programs, such as payments to landlords for rent assistance (as in the Section 8 program) or the rents landlords can charge tenants (as in a cap under the HOME program). The 2007 Fair Market Rents are shown in Table 3. Table 3. Spokane 2007 Fair Market Rents (HUD) (effective 4/28/07) 0 bedroom 1 bedroom 2 bedrooms 3 bedrooms 4 bedrooms $42S $498 $6S6 $901 $1021 �f A Spokane household needs a monthly income of $2,187, or $26,240 /year to afford a two - bedroom apartment at the fair market rent of $656 (including utilities) without paying more than 30% of its income for housing costs. This translates into a housing wage of $12.62 /hour for a full time wage earner (40 hours /week, 52 weeks /year). The .NLIHC determined that the 2005 mean wage for a Spokane renter is $9.14 /hour, or $19,011 /year. The fair market rent of $656 /month for "a 2 bedroom unit would be 41% of the renter's monthly income of,$1,584. If the renter °could only afford to pay 30 %`of income for housing, he /she would have to work more hours to increase income to the $26,240 level (see preceding paragraph). This would. require working 55.4 hours each week, which could be one person working multiple jobs .or two people working part- time. AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE MID TERM OBJECTIVES October 25, 2007 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE SHELTER PLUS CARE PROGRAM October 25, 2007 Shelter Plus Care Program The Shelter Plus Care Program, through the Department of Housing and Urban Development, provides rental assistance for hard -to -serve homeless persons with disabilities in connection with supportive services funded from sources outside the program. Shelter Plus Care (S +C) is a program designed to provide housing and supportive services on a long -term basis for homeless persons with disabilities, (primarily those with serious mental illness, chronic problems with alcohol and /or drugs, and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) or related diseases) and their families who are living in places not intended for human habitation (e.g., streets) or in emergency shelters. The program allows for a variety of housing choices, and a range of supportive services funded by other sources, in response to the needs of the hard -to -reach homeless population with disabilities. The City of Spokane Human Services- Department is the lead applicant for a number of Shelter Plus Care grants, working with local non - profit agencies (Sponsors) to provide the housing and services. Recently, Northeast Washington Housing Solutions was approved to.take over sponsorship of a Shelter Plus Care grant awarded to the City in 2001 yet for a variety of reasons was never fully operational. This grant will provide for approximately 28 single room occupancy units for homeless, disabled individuals in Spokane. AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE TURNER BUILDING October 25, 2007 Marty Dickinson From: Trautman, Paul [PTrautman @SpokaneCity.org]. Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 3:11 PM To: Marty Dickinson Subject: Needed items for report - Final Info Marty — final info for the draft summary report: 1- Up to date Roster of current Taskforce membership Please add as ",Others not on this list but present at the table and treated as members ": Steve Cervantes, Executive Director of Spokane Housing Authority. Bev Gates, City CD Board 2- .Turner.updates- (notes or e- mails, or handouts from Cyndi Algeo) Steve Cervantes, Executive Director of Spokane Housing Authority dba Northeast Washington•Housing Solutions 252 -7139 NEWHS is negotiating with the property owner and current leaseholder for acquisition. They hope to acquire in mid - November or early December. NEWHS had preliminary discussions with Pioneer Human Services regarding, possible sublease for early occupancy.. Currently completing acquisition due diligence: appraisal, environmental review, and financing. Plan to provide Shelter Plus Care vouchers to support low- income and formerly homeless tenants. Building is located near. YWCA daycare and cannot house sex offenders. Paul Trautman Housing Program Administrator City of Spokane Community Development Dept. 808 V✓. Spokane Falls Blvd, #650, Spokane, WA 99201 phone: 509-625-6325 fax: 509-625-6315 Protecting Spokane Kids From Lead -Based Paint - Lead Safe Spokane Call 755 -755.5 for more information! 10/25/2007 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE 2163 FUNDS October 25, 2007 2163 Funding On August 31, 2007, The City of Spokane Human Services Department, in partnership with Spokane County, the City of Spokane Valley and other regional jurisdictions, announced the second annual round of funding available through the Homeless Housing Assistance Act (ESSHB2163). The act applies a surcharge of $10 on each real estate transaction within Washington State. Each county collects the funds and sends 40 percent to the state and uses the other 60 percent locally toward reducing homelessness in their county. An estimated $700,000 in funds is being made available through a Request for. Proposals (RFP) process. Proposals are currently being reviewed by a task force of members appointed by the regional jurisdictions. It is anticipated that funding decisions will be finalized by the end of the year. Funding generated through the Act supports activities that to the greatest extent possible further the goals, strategies and actions identified in the Spokane Regional 10 Year Plan to Address Homelessness. The Homelessness Housing Assistance Act (2163) Task Force will consider proposals that support the following principles: • Strategies and actions identified in the 10 Year Plan to address Homelessness • Ensures a regional approach to reducing homelessness • Are responsive to current community need and gaps - Have demonstrated performance in achieving positive client and /or system outcomes. • Demonstrate collaboration among service providers and other community resources. In addition to the above mentioned principles, the task force is seeking proposals that address the following priorities: ■ Permanent Supportive Housing for homeless individuals, families and independent youth. • Supportive Services for those homeless individuals, families and independent youth in Permanent Supportive Housing, Transitional Housing, Emergency Shelters and /or on the streets. Homelessness prevention for individuals, families and independent youth at risk of homelessness. ■ Employment training and education for homeless individuals, families and independent youth currently not employed. Goal: Increase percentage of homeless persons becoming employed in suitable employment. Emergency Shelter, short-term emergency shelter for homeless individuals, families and /or independent youth. MABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE 1 r.INIAI TT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE DRAFT ORDINANCE AND NOTES October 25, 2007 Spokane Neighborhood Action Programs J HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES DIVISION. 2116 East First Avenue, Spokane WA 99202 SNAP (509) 456 -7111 or FAX 534 -5874 To: Ray Rieckers Cc: Kaitlin Brown; Sam Colito; Matthew Luedke From: Nicholas J. DeSelle Date: 7/23/2007 Re: An analysis of Low Income Tenant Relocation Assistance, without too much legalese 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE WASHINGTON STATUTE You have asked for an analysis of Washington State's Residential Landlord- Tenant Act (Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 59.18.440), and additionally, for a review of other suggestions which would lead to a more effective and efficient plan for the City of Spokane. To greater understand the law itself I will first discuss each element of RCW 59,18:440(1): A. Element 1 Any city, town, county, or municipal corporation that is required to develop a comprehensive plan under RCW 36.70A.040(1) ... This defines who the statute applies to. RCW 36.70A.040 requires that the City of Spokane draft and adopt a comprehensive plan .2 This means that Spokane is a qualified entity under RCW 59.18.040(1). B. Elements 2 & 3 ... is authorized to require, after reasonable notice to the public and a public hearing, property owners to provide their portion of reasonable relocation assistance to low - income tenants . The second element of the statute explains that the provision of "reasonable relocation assistance to low income tenants" is not required, but rather "is authorized." This means that an entity which meets the requirements of the first element is then allowed to Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 59.18.440 (2007) z See: http://www.spokaneplanning.org/Documents/cityplqnlprocess/plan ord.pdf 1 July 23, 2007 choose whether or not to develop a plan providing assistance to displaced low income tenants. The only requirement they place on this flexibility is the third element: if the city elects to implement, they must first provide reasonable notice to the public and a public hearing. For example, on July 7, 199Q, the Seattle City Council held a public hearing on their Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance.3 At the hearing they concluded that various moving costs, from one location in the city to another location in the city, amounted to $2,191.00.4 This total includes: 1) estimated physical `moving costs, 2) first I nd last months rent, 3) damage deposit,,and 4) the difference in _rent from one home to another.5 Taking this into account, the City Council concluded that the relocation assistance paid in Seattle should total the maximum allowed under state law, $2000.00.6 Half of this amount was to be paid by Seattle and the other half was to be paid by the property owner.7 C. Element 4 ... upon the demolition, substantial rehabilitation whether due to code enforcement or any other reason, or change of use of residential property, or upon the removal of use restrictions in an assisted housing development... This element provides the conditions under which disbursement of assistance to low income tenants would occur. Here, Spokane is authorized to institute a system to provide assistance to displaced residents at the Otis Hotel for either of two separate reasons: a) The building is being substantially rehabilitated, or; b) Use restrictions in an assisted housing development are being removed. D. What the Law Does Not Do The Residential Landlord- Tenant Act does not map out the process by which the assistance will be distributed.. The entity implementing policy is tasked with developing policies, procedures, and regulations to distribute the funds. The framework implemented must only include "provisions for administrative hearings to resolve disputes between tenants and property owners relating to. relocation assistance or unlawful detainer actions during relocation," and the ability to appeal the findings of those administrative hearings to the Superior Court if they are believed to be:. 3 Seattle, Wash., Municipal Code (SMC) § 22.210 (2007). 4 Garneau v. Seattle, 147 F.3d 802., 805 (1998). s Id. 6 Id. Seattle, Wash., Municipal Code (SMC) § 22.2 10.11 O(A) (2007). 2 July 23, 2007 a) In violation of constitutional provisions; b) In excess of authority or jurisdiction of the administrative hearing officer; c) Made upon unlawful procedure or otherwise contrary to law; or d) Arbitrary or capricious.$ E. Final Notes on State.Law Washington state law, as a whole, provides relocation assistance for tenants only in specific situations. These include when: a) The tenant is low income and the city, town, county or municipal corporation has authorized relocation assistance under RCW 59.18.440; b) A building is "condemned or will be unlawful to occupy due to the 'existence of conditions that violate applicable codes, statutes, ordinances, or regulations," or;9 c) The tenant's building is being converted to condominiums and the city, town, county or municipal corporation has authorized relocation assistance under RCW 64.34.440 ° RCW 59.18.440(3) provides that "the jurisdiction [ordering the provision of assistance] shall evaluate, and receive public testimony on, what relocation expenses displaced tenants would reasonably incur," and the jurisdiction shall then determine what amount should be awarded to those displaced in there specific communities.' 1 Further, awards are then adjusted annually to reflect changes in the housing component of the local. consumer price index. Again using Seattle for an example, as of October 16; 2006, the amount of relocation assistance awarded was $2,664.00. The act itself is silent on whether a city may intentionally limit the number of displaced low income tenants who would be eligible for relocation assistance under state law. In theory, this could be easily accomplished by creating "zones" of eligibility within a city or by imposing a threshold minimum or maximum building size requirement; however, prior litigation warns us that this is likely unconstitutional. In Garneau v. Seattle, the Federal District Court for the Western District of Washington explains that, in Seattle, "all owners of residential units containing low - income tenants, who applied for permits to demolish, rehabilitate, change the use of, or remove use restrictions from residential units after passage of the TRAO, are treated alike under the TRAO." 12 Seattle's TRAO does not "discriminate against a suspect class," and thus does not violate the Equal Protection Clause. 13 This means that if RCW 59.18.440 were to be applied to a class 8 Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 59.18.440(5) (2007). 9 Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 59.18.085 (2007). 10 Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 64.34.440 (2007). 11 Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 59.18.440(3) (2007). 12 Garneau v. Seattle, 897 F.Supp. 1318, 1324 n.7 (W.D. Wash. 1995) 13 Kawaoka v. Arroyo Grande, 17 F.3d 1227, 1238 (1994); U.S. Const. amend XIV, § 1. 3 July 23, 2007 within the group of Spokane property owners, it would deny to a number. of those property owners "the equal protection of the laws." 14 H. THE SEATTLE MODEL As discussed, low income tenant relocation assistance in Seattle is addressed by its Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance (TRAO). 15 The ordinance states that its purpose is to "provide relocation assistance to low-income tenants displaced by demolition, substantial rehabilitation, or change of use of residential rental property, or the removal of use restrictions from. assisted housing developments. "16 In sum, Seattle will provide assistance to displaced individuals based solely upon their failure to earn more than fifty percent of the average median income. in practice, the TRAO provides very clear instruction for both tenant and' property owner and ties the distribution of relocation assistance to issuance of building permits. In practice, until a property owner has provided money: for displaced tenants, she will not receive a Tenant Relocation License or building permits, and thus will be unable to begin work on her building. 17 The Seattle process begins with the property owner applying to the Seattle Department of Planning and Development (DPD) for a Tenant Relocation License-18 The owner then must furnish to her tenants, within thirty days, information and eligibility forms.19 .Tenants will then, in most instances, have a maximum of thirty days to complete and return the forms to DPD. 20 After the forms are returned and the owner has been notified of tenant eligibility, he then has five days to pay her portion of relocation assistance to DPD and issue notices to her tenants requiring them to vacate within 90 days. 21 The tenants may then apply for and be awarded the funds from DPD, but are also required to vacate no later than the end of the 90 day period .22 Remaining monies are returned to the property owner "thirty (30) days after final unappealed decisions regarding eligibility of all tenants of the affected units. "23 One notable problem with the Seattle model is that the TRAO does nothing to prevent an unscrupulous landlord from foregoing the process and simply raising the rents to 14 U.S. Const. amend XIV, § 1 1s Seattle, Wash., Municipal Code (SMC) § 22.210 (2007). 16 Seattle, Wash., Municipal Code (SMC) § 22.210.010(B) (2007). 17 For more information on Seattle's Tenant Relocation License Application process, see http: / /www.seattle.gov /dpd /publications /cam /cam 123.pdf. 18 Seattle, Wash., Municipal Code (SMC) § 22.210.110(B) 19 Id. 20 Id. 21 Id. 22 Id. 23 Seattle, Wash., Municipal Code (SMC) § 22.210.130(F). 4 ■ July 23, 2007 force his tenants to move. 24 One documented case in Seattle saw rents doubled and tenants given ten day notices stating they must agree to new terms or vacate.25 This practice circumvents the TRAO and frees unethical property owners from any assistance obligation. III. MAY A RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM BE ADMINISTERED BY A THIRD PARTY? Washington State law does not prohibit the assignment of a third party subcontractor to manage the program and distribute the funds. 26 Spokane could elect to contract with a third party in order to minimize the resources they would expend on management of a relocation assistance program and maximize the efficient use of funds distributed. If Spokane were to implement a program where assistance is provided to tenants displaced by renovations at the Otis Hotel and other downtown buildings, the improper implementation of such_ a program could result in the issuance of a handout that is quickly, and improperly spent by many irresponsible recipients. The aforementioned fact spotlights an ethical dilemma. One may argue that a recipient of assistance should be allowed to spend "their" money as they see fit; however, relocation assistance money is not and should not be considered income.27 The money is provided for a very specific purpose: to facilitate the relocation of low income tenants who very easily, without such an allowance, could find themselves homeless. Accordingly, the funds allocated may stand the best chance of accomplishing there intended goal if they came with guidance as to how they may be best spent. State law does not prohibit the imposition of policies or programs which encourage the proper expenditure of relocation assistance funds as long as such procedures are not: 1) in violation of constitutional provisions, 2) unlawful, or 3) arbitrary and capricious. Additionally, the requirement for an administrative hearing and the potential for judicial review, serve as a check on any requirements which the city may elect to include on the dispersal of funds. IV. CONCLUSIONS The adoption of a low income tenant assistance ordinance in Spokane will likely be a daunting task for all parties involved, but our responsibility to even our most defenseless neighbors is one which we cannot run from. Economist Michael Sheehan points out that Seattle's ordinance meets the need of the population it was intended to serve, and further, the cost of the assistance may be far less than the loss of rent and eviction 24 See e.g. Sciglano, Eric, The Edgar Street massacre, Seattle Weekly (Sept. 23, 1998), available at: http: / /www.seattleweekly.com /1998- 09 -23/ news /the -e_d ar- street- massacre.p ; 25 Id. 26 See Garneau, 897 F.Supp. at 1326 -1327 (explaining that the TRAO is not a tax and hence is not prohibited from assignment by Article VII, § I of the Washington State Constitution) 27 See Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 59.18.450. July 23, 2007 proceedings which often accompany a tenant who leaves on less than amicable terms.28 In Spokane, the adoption of a low income tenant relocation ordinance could in fact accelerate, and not hinder, the redevelopment of the downtown area. And one final point. The community empowerment zone tax incentives which certainly contributed to BlueRay Technologies decision to come to Spokane, are intended to "encourage reinvestment through strong partnerships and cooperation between all levels of government, community -based organizations, area residents, and the private sector. "29 It could be'arguedhere that the area residents are being excluded from the partnership and intent of the Legislature'is being retarded in the interest of maximizing profits. Neither myself, nor anyone I have encountered is opposed to the renovation of the Otis Hotel and the addition of BlueRay to our community; however, the way in which the players have chosen to develop and collect benefits inherent with such, development while at the`same time neglecting the intent .of the legislation which provided them with the incentives in the first place is regrettable. I "would argue that if, 'as a byproduct of economic development in a community empowerment zone, we are adding an unexpected expense to some of the poorest households in Washington, we are failing to help "area residents gain economic power," and instead we, as a community, are adding to their hardshi p s.30 28 See Sheehan, Michael, Ph.D. Seattle's Low- Income Tenant Relocation Ordinance: A Review of Professor Heyne's Economic Analysis; (Jan. 1995), available at: http: / /www.fsconline ;com /downloads /Papers /1995 %2001 %20RENTRELO.pdf. 29 Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 433 1 C. 005(2)(a). 30 Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 43.31C.005(1)(b). 6 e Planning and Development Client Assistance Memo 609 $li [=il of 1 11 X11 11:i 1t®(: Seattle's Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance Updated June 1, 2005 What is the Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance? This is an ordinance enacted by the Seattle City Council on June 25, 1990, which provides. benefits for residential tenants who will be displaced by housing demolition, substantial rehabilitation, change of use or removal of use restrictions on assisted housing. Benefits include payment of relocation assistance to low income tenants and advance notice of the planned development. Who is affected? The ordinance affects owners of residential property occupied by a tenant if that tenant will have. o mode because of any of the actions listed above. ° he Department of Planning and Development (DPD) Remits fof r ,__inp, * iQn, change of use or substantial rehabilitation uril ss rPrn liramants of the ordinance are met What is required? Owners of property slated for redevelopment or rehabilitation must obtain a Tenant t3Plocation Licease from flPfl h.,fr,rn --" i o'r-lomnlitinn or dine normit xerill ho i io fwiL.�,.,- __i,S„ cl- Application for a license is required at the same time as application for project permits: ,Who�is eligible for relocation assistance? t ,the City pays the other h How long does it take to get a license? It usually takes six months to obtain a license. The owner must provide tenants with program information and notice of the project. Tenants have 30 days to apply for relocation assistance. After DPD evaluates eligibility, a 90 -day notice to all tenants is required to be issued and to expire before a Tenant Relocation License can be issued, regardless of whether tenants are eligible for relocation assistance payments. Program forms are provided by the City and there are specific procedures which must be followed; these are. explained in the license application materials. How to apply for a Relocation License To apply for a Tenant Relocation License, visit DPD's Property Owner and Tenance Assistance Unit, located on the 19th floor of Seattle Municipal Tower at 700 Fifth Ave., or call (206) 684 -7979, (206) 684 -7867, or (206) 386 -9733. Please bring the property legal description, DPD project number, and a list of tenants' names and telephone numbers when applying for a license. REMEMBER: NO permit can be issued by DPD if the work it involves will displace tenants UNLESS a Tenant Relocation License has been obtained. To avoid delays in your project, find out if you need a license and apply right away if you do. PLEASE NOTE: DPD public information documents should not be used as substitutes for codes and regulations. Details of your situation should be reviewed for specific compliance by DPD staff. Printed on totally chlorine -free poper mode with 100% post - consumer fiber i z f" f DPD Client. Assistance Memo #609 — Seaftle's Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance page 2 Tenant `Relocation License Application to DPD for rental housing Expiration of Use • demolition Restriction on • change of use Assisted Housing • majorrehab Application to DPD for Tenant Relocation License 30 -day maximum Owner delivers information and eligibility forms to Tenants 30 days with possible extension IF Tenants return eligibility forms to DPD 15 -day maximum Hearing Eligibility Examiner 10 -day appeal period — Determination Appeal Notice to Tenants and Owner 30 -day es no y no maximum - - - -- yes — Eligible Not Eligible < 50% of > 50% of County median County median income income Owner pays $1,231.00 /household Ownerissues to DPD 90 -day notice to tenants Eligible tenant applies to DPD 90 days for Payment LICENSE ISSUED Payment made by DPD Eligible tenant Non- eligible tenant required to vacate by required to vacate after end of 90 -day period separate termination notice LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This Client Assistance Memo (CAM) should not be used as a substitute for codes and regulations. The applicant is . ' responsible for compliance with all code and rule requirements, whether or not described in this CAM. fcentai of conoemnea or uniawrui aweiimg RCW 59.18.085 Rental of condemned or u.nlaw-f -d dwelling — Tenant's remedies — Relocation assistance — Penalties. (1) If a governmental agency responsible for the enforcement of a building, housing, or other appropriate code has notified the landlord that a dwelling is condemned or unlawful to occupy due to the existence of conditions that violate applicable codes, statutes, ordinances, or regulations, a landlord shall not enter into a rental agreement for the dwelling unit until the conditions are corrected. (2) If a landlord knowingly violates subsection (1) of this section, the tenant shall recover either three months' periodic rent or up to treble the actual damages sustained as a result of the violation, whichever is greater, costs of suit, or arbitration and reasonable attorneys' fees. If the tenant elects to terminate the tenancy as a result of the conditions leading to the posting, or if the appropriate governmental agency requires that the tenant vacate the premises, the tenant also shall recover: (a) The entire amount of any deposit prepaid by the tenant; and (b) All prepaid rent. (3)(a) If a governi Wi 9l"agency responsible for the enforcement of a building, housing, . or rater ap has notified thldlord that a dwelling will be condemned or will be unlawful to occupy due to the exi conditions the violate applicable codes, statutes r ' nces, or re ulation ,landlord., who knew or ese con i ions. shall be reauired to pav relocation assistance to the disol .s (i) A landlord shall not be required to pay relocation assistance to any displaced tenant in a casein which the condemnation or no occupancy order affects one or more dwelling units and directly results from conditions caused by a tenant's or any third party's illegal conduct without the landlord's prior knowledge; (ii) A landlord shall not be required to pay relocation assistance to any displaced tenant in a case in which the condemnation or no occupancy order affects one or more dwelling units and results from conditions arising from a natural disaster such as, but not exclusively, an earthquake, tsunami, wind storm, or hurricane; and (iii) A landlord shall. not be required to pay relocation assistance to any displaced tenant in a case in which a condemnation affects one or more dwelling units and the tenant's displacement is a direct result of the acquisition of the property by,eminent domain. (b) Relocation assistance provided IQ d isplaced tenants under this subsectie thousan dollars per dwellinq unit or three times the monthly rent. In —addition to ✓ to the displaced tenants the entire (c) The landlord shall pay ielmati!2n gssistance and anV prepaid deposit and prepaid rent to dis laced tenants. within seven ays of the governmental agency sending notice oft the condemnation, eviction, or displacement order to t e andlor -d he landlord shall pay relocation assistance and any prepaid deposit and prepaid rent either by making individual payments by certified check to displaced tenants or by providing a certified check to the governmental agency ordering condemnation, eviction, or displacement, for distribution to the displaced tenants. If the landlord fails to complete payment of relocation assistance within the period required under this subsection, the city, town, county, or municipal corporation may advance the cost of the relocation assistance payments to the displaced tenants. (d) During the period from the date that a governmental agency responsible for the enforcement of a building, housing, or other appropriate code first notifies the landlord of conditions that violate applicable codes, statutes, ordinances, or regulations to the time that relocation assistance payments are paid to eligible tenants, or the conditions leading to the notification are corrected, the landlord may not: (i) Evict, harass, or intimidate tenants into vacating their units for the purpose of avoiding or diminishing application of this section; (ii) Reduce services to any tenant; or (iii) Materially increase or change the obligations of any tenant, including but not limited to any rent increase. (e) Displaced tenants shall be entitled to recover any relocation assistance, prepaid deposits, and prepaid rent of 2 7/19/2007 10:34 AM &%-.w ay.ia.uao: Kenai of conaemnea or unlawful awetung — iena... http✓ /apps. leg. wa. gov /RCW /detAult.aspxYcite= 59.18.085. required by (b) of this subsection. In addition, displaced tenants shall be entitled to recover any actual damages sustained by them as, a result of the condemnation, eviction, or displacement that exceed the amount of relocation assistance that is payable. In any action brought by displaced tenants to recover any payments or damages required or authorized by this subsection (3)(e) or (c) of this subsection that are not paid by the landlord or advanced by the city, town, county, or municipal corporation, the displaced tenants shall also be entitled to recover their costs of suit or arbitration and reasonable attorneys' fees. (f) If, after sixty days fr m the date that the city, town, county, or municipal corporation first advanced relocation assis ance funds to the displaced tenants, a landlord has faile he amount of relocation assistance advanced by the city, town, county, or municipal co r ion under c of this subsection, then the city, town county. or municipal corporation shall assess civil penalties in the amount of fifty dollars per day tenant to whom the city, town, or municipa pora ion as a vance a relocation assistance patent. (g) In addition to the penalties set forth in (f) of this subsection, interest will accrue on the amount of relocation assistance paid by the city, town, county, or municipal corporation for which the property owner has not reimbursed the city, town, county, or municipal corporation. The rate of interest shall be the maximum legal rate of interest permitted under RCW 19.52.020, commencing thirty days after the date that the city first advanced relocation assistance funds to the displaced tenants. (h) If the city, town, county, or municipal corporation must initiate legal action in order to recover the amount of relocation assistance payments that it has advanced to low- income tenants, including any interest and penalties under (f) and (g) of this subsection, the city, town, county, or municipal corporation shall be entitled to attorneys' fees and costs arising from its legal action. (4) The, government agency that has notified the landlord that a dwelling will be condemned or will be unlawful to occupy shall notify the displaced tenants that they may be entitled to relocation assistance under this section. (5) No payment received by a displaced tenant under this section may be considered as income for the purpose of determining the eligibility or extent of eligibility of any person for assistance under any state law or for the purposes of any tax imposed under Title 82 RCW, and the-payments shall not be deducted from any amount to which any recipient would otherwise be entitled under Title 74 RCW. [2005 c 364 § 2; 1989 c 342 § 13.] Notes: Purpose -- 2005 c 364: "The people of the state of Washington deserve decent, safe, and sanitary housing. Certain tenants in the state of Washington have remained in rental housing that does not meet the state's minimum standards for health and safety because they cannot afford to pay the costs of relocation in advance of occupying new, safe, and habitable housing. In egregious cases, authorities have been forced to condemn property when landlords have failed to remedy building -code or health code violations after repeated notice, and, as a. result, families with limited financial resources have been displaced and left with nowhere to go. The purpose of this act is to establish a process by which displaced tenants would receive funds for relocation. from landlords who fail to provide safe and sanitary housing after due notice of building code or health code violations. It is also the purpose of this act to provide enforcement mechanisms to cities, towns, counties, or municipal corporations including the ability to advance relocation funds to tenants who are displaced as a result of a landlord's failure to remedy building code or health code violations and later to collect the full amounts .of these relocation funds, along with interest and penalties, from landlords." [2005 c 364 § 1.] Construction -- 2005 c 364: "The powers and authority conferred by this act are in addition .and supplemental to powers or authority conferred by any. other law or authority, and nothing contained herein shall be construed to preempt any local ordinance requiring relocation assistance to tenants displaced by a landlord's failure to remedy building code or health code violations." [2005 c 364 § 4.] ' of 7/19/2007 10:34 AM RCW 59.18.440 r" Relocation assistance for low- income tenants — Certain cities, towns, counties, municipal corporations authorized. to require. (1) Any city, town, county, or municipal corporation that is required to develop a comprehensive plan under RCW 36.70A.040(1) is authorized to require, after reasonable notice to the public and a public hearing, property owners to provide.their portion of reasonable relocation assistance to low- income tenants upon the demolition, substantial rehabilitation whether due to code enforcement or any other reason, or change of use of residential property, or upon the removal of use restrictions in an assisted - housing development. No city, town, county, or municipal corporation may require property owners to provide relocation assistance to low - income tenants, as defined in this chapter, upon the demolition, substantial rehabilitation, upon the change of use of residential property, or upon the removal of use restrictions in an assisted- housing development, except as expressly authorized herein or when authorized or required by state or federal law. As used in this section, "assisted housing development" means a multifamily rental housing development that either . receives government assistance and is defined as federally assisted housing in RCW 59.28.020, or that receives other federal, state, or local government assistance and is subject to use restrictions. (2) As used in this section, "low- income tenants" means tenants whose combined total income per. dwelling unit is at or below, fifty percent of the median income, adjusted for family size, in the county where the tenants reside. The department of community, trade, and economic development shall adopt rules defining county median income in accordance with the definitions promulgated by the federal department of housing and urban development. (3) A requirement that property owners provide relocation assistance shall include the amounts of such assistance to be provided to low- income tenants. In determining. such amounts, the jurisdiction imposing the requirement shall evaluate, and receive public testimony on, what relocation expenses displaced.. tenants would reasonably incur in that jurisdiction including: (a) Actual physical moving costs and expenses; (b) Advance payments required for moving into a new residence such as the cost of first and last month's rent and security and damage deposits; (c) Utility connection fees and deposits; and (d) Anticipated additional rent and utility costs in the residence for one year after relocation. (4)(a) Relocation assistance provided to low- income tenants under this section shall not exceed two thousand dollars for each dwelling unit displaced by actions of the property owner under subsection (1) of this section. A city, town, county, or municipal corporation may make future annual adjustments to the maximum amount of relocation assistance required under this subsection in order to reflect any changes in the housing component of the consumer price index as published by the United States department of labor, bureau of labor statistics. (b) The property owner's portion of any relocation assistance provided to low- income tenants under this section shall not exceed one -half of the required relocation assistance under (a) of this subsection in cash or services. (c) The portion of relocation assistance not covered by the property owner under (b) of this subsection shall be paid by the city, town, county, or municipal corporation authorized to require relocation assistance under subsection (1) of this section. The relocation assistance may be paid from proceeds collected from the excise tax imposed under RCW 82.46.010. (5) A city, town; county, or municipal corporation requiring the provision of relocation: assistance, under this section shall adopt policies, procedures, or regulations to implement such requirement. Such policies, procedures, or regulations shall include provisions for administrative hearings to resolve disputes between' tenants and property owners relating to relocation assistance or unlawful detainer actions during relocation, and shall require a decision within thirty days of a request for a hearing by either a tenant or property owner. Judicial review of an administrative hearing decision relating to relocation assistance may be had by filing a petition, within ten days of the decision, in the superior court in the county where the residential property is located. Judicial review shall be confined to the record of the administrative hearing and the court may reverse the decision only if the administrative findings, inferences, conclusions, or decision is: (a) In violation of constitutional provisions; (b) In excess of the authority or jurisdiction of the administrative hearing officer; (c) Made upon unlawful procedure or otherwise is contrary to law; or (d) Arbitrary and capricious. (6) Any city, town, county, or municipal corporation may require relocation assistance, under the terms of this section, for otherwise eligible tenants whose living arrangements are exempted from the provisions of this chapter under RCW 59.18:040(3) and if the living arrangement is considered to be'a rental or lease not defined as a retail sale under RCW 82.04.050. (7)(a) Persons who move from a dwelling, unit priorto the application by the owner of the dwelling unit for any governmental permit necessary for the demolition, substantial rehabilitation, or change of use of residential property or prior to any notification or filing required for condominium conversion shall not be entitled to the assistance authorized by this section. (b),Persons who move' 66a dwelling unit after the application for any necessary governmental permit or after any required condominium conversion notification or filing shall not be entitled to the assistance authorized by this section if such persons receive written notice from the property owner prior to taking possession of the dwelling unit that specifically describes the activity or condition that may result in their temporary or permanent displacement and advises them of their ineligibility for relocation assistance. [1997 c 452 § 17; 1995 c 399 § 151; 1990 1st ex.s. c 17 § 49.] AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE SPOKANE SPECIFIC TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE DRAFT ORDINANCE AND NOTES October 25, 2007 Comments Key Asst City Atty revisions incorporating 10111/07 Task Force comments 10123107 .r= Tom Tremaine 10/ 10/07 email and subsequent revisions /comments 10/ 17/07 Task Force comments i 10/ 17/07 Joe Shogan comments ORDINANCE NO. C- An ordinance regarding tenant relocation assistance; creating a new chapter of the Spokane Municipal Code designated as Chapter The City of Spokane does ordain: Chapter Tenant Relocation Assistance Purpose. Pursuant to RCW 59.18.440 cities may require property owners to provide reasonable relocation assistance for low income tenants upon the Idemolition, substantial rehabilitation or change or elimination of residential use:, or upon the 1 oluntary removal of use restrictions in assisted housing -- Cnmmeni sffiYUte ace��onz -. ... -- - --------------------------- this lvnit�hon development. This chapter establishes the requirements and procedures for - providing relocation assistance for low income tenants who are displaced as a Deleted: of use or residential property result of demolition, substantial rehabilitation or change or elimination -of Formatted: Not H6hfignt residential use, or upon the removal of use restrictions in an assisted housing development. Definitions. The following words and phrases When used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise indicates, shall have the following meanings: A. "Assisted housing development" means a multifamily rental housing development that either receives government-assistance and -is defined as federally assisted housing. in RCW 59.28.020, or- .that receives,other federal; state, or local government assistance, "A is subject to, use restrictions. B. "Change or elimination of residenial use" =means the conversion of a. dwelling unit to a nonresidential use or the elimination of a dwelling -unit. C. "City codes" means the Land use code, Uniform building Code and related standards, Uniform Housing Code, Washington State Energy Code, Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, and National Electrical Code, as adopted and amended by this code. D. "Demolition" means the . intentional destruction by orl on behalf of the owner of any dwelling unit or the relocation of an existing dwelling unit or units to another site: E. "Director" means the director of the department of or City Department of or the director's designee. F. "Displacement or Displaced" means that existing tenants must vacate the dwelling unit because of the demolition, substantial rehabilitation, change or elimination of residential use or the removal of use restrictions in an assisted housing development. For purposes of this chapter, "displacement" shall not include the permanent relocation of a tenant from one dwelling unit G. "Low income tenants" means tenants whose combined total l household income per dwelling is at or below forty percent of the median income as adjusted for family size, as determined by the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development for Spokane County or the Spokane Metropolitan Statistical Area. Formatted: HlghlIght I. "Substantial rehabilitation" means extensive structural repair or extensive remodeling which requires a building, electrical, plumbing, or mechanical permit, and which cannot be done with the tenant in occu anc . (Option - substitute City definition of substantial rehab: J. "Tenants means any person who is entitled to occupy a dwelling unit primarily for living or dwelling purposes under a rental agreement and includes those persons who are considered to be tenants.under the State. Residential Landlord Tenant Act, Chapter, 59.:1$, RC For purposes of this cl a dwelling unit or members of the Exceptions. shallshall no include the owner of . - . .............................- ------ - - - - -- - - -- ..- ..................... iate family. 2 Relocation assistance payment amounts. A. Low income tenants who are displaced by demolition, substantial rehabilitation; change or elimination of a residential use, or removal of use restrictions in an assisted d' housing development and who comply with the requirements of this chapter, shall be . the amount up to $2,200 per dwelling unit The amount of relocation assistance shall be adjusted annually by the percentage amount of change in the housing component of the Consumer Price Index as published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. C. The owner is responsible for payment in cash of one -half of the required relocation assistance per dwelling unit. The portion of the relocation assistance not payable by the owner shall be paid by'the city up to a maximum of one -half the total payment amount. Permit issuance. The requirements of this chapter must be complied with prior to the issuance of a residential demolition permit or permits relating to 'substantial rehabilitation prior to the eviction of tenants for change or elimination of residential use. Notification to tenants. The owner shall deliver to each tenant in each dwelling unit to be, demolished, changed in use, substantially rehabilitated, or from which use restrictions are to be removed a' ninety (90) day notice of the owner's intention to demolish, substantially rehabilitate, change the use of or remove use restrictions from the dwelling unit. The notice shall include a tenant income verification form and instructions that the tenants must complete and return the form to the director within 45 days from the date that the notice was mailed. The ninety day notification requirement under this section is separate from any notification requirement under the 3 �J Landlord Tenant Act, Chapter 59.18. RCW.. At the time of the ninety -day notification the owner shall provide a list of current tenants to the Director: l Tenant eligibility for relocation assistance. A. The completed information on the tenant income verification form shall include the names of all occupants of the dwelling unit, the total combined income of the occupants of the dwelling unit, and the total combined income of the occupants for the current calendar year. Any tenant who fails to return a completed tenant income verification form to the director within 45 days from the notification date shall not be eligible for relocation assistance, unless the tenant has requested and received a written extension from the director. B. Based on the information contained in the tenant income verification form, the director shall determine which tenants qualify as low income tenants and are therefore eligible to receive relocation assistance upon displacement. C. Within 15 days of the director's receipt of the signed relocation assistance forms from all tenants or within 15 days of the expiration of the tenants 45 -day period for submitting signed relocation assistance forms to the . director, whichever occurs first, the director shall send to each tenant. household who submitted a signed form and to the owner by both regular United States mail and certified mail, a notice stating whether the tenant qualifies as a low income tenant and is eligible for relocation assistance. The director shall send notice to the owner indicating all tenants deemed eligible for relocation assistance. D. Within fifteen days of the tenant being notified that he or she is eligible for relocation assistance, the tenant shall meet with a case worker assigned by the city to determine if there are any other available financial assistance programs in order to reduce the amount of the relocation, assistance provided under this chapter. E. Both the tenant and the owner may file an appeal with the hearing . examiner, pursuant to SMC , of the director's determination of the tenant's eligibility for relocation assistance.. The hearing` examiner must issue a decision within 30 days from the date the appeal was filed. Owner's contribution to relocation assistance. Within 10 days after receipt by the owner of the director's notice of tenant eligibility, the owner shall pay to the director one -half of the total relocation assistance cost. If an appeal is filed pursuant to SMC , the owner's contribution is due within 10 days of the hearing examiner's decision. The total relocation assistance shall be calculated based on the number of 4 units occupied by tenant households who are determined by the director to be eligible for relocation assistance, as modified by any decisions by the "hearing examiner concerning eligibility for relocation assistance, multiplied by the payment amount established in SMC w£ Upon receipt of _ the owner's share of — rn relocation assistance costs, the director shall send total relocation assistance verification that the tenant will be displaced by the demolition, substantial rehabilitation or change in or elimination of residential use. Relocation assistance funds may only be used by the tenant for actual physical moving costs and expenses, and advance payments required for moving into a new residence such as the cost of first and last month's rent and security and damage deposits, utility connection fees and deposits, rental application fees, and pet deposit fees. Any relocation assistance funds not expended shall be returned to the owner and the City in equal amounts. Appeal of hearing examiner decision. A decision of the hearing examiner under SMC is the final city decision. The decision of the hearing examiner may be appealed to superior court by filing a petition within 10 calendar days following the date of the 5 decision. Appeals to superior court are made by application for a writ.of certiorari, writ of prohibition or writ of mandamus. Eviction protection. A. During the period from the date that the owner provides notice to the tenants to the time that relocation assistance payments are paid to eligible tenants, the owner shall not: 1. h Formatted: Font: Not Bold, Not a� M9 rtalle- Hiahlldht Formatted: Highlight 2. . ..........................._................_--.....-°---- ................. - ............. .--- °..... --- °..... - ................ - .... ..... D purpose of avoiding or diminishing application of this chapters:�itee including unreasonable rent increase orleiea: 2. Reduce the services to any tenant; or 3. Materially increase or change the obligations of any tenant; B. Low income tenants.who, are evicted. or vacate as a result of ;.. Formatted: Highlight subsections A1, 2 and 3 of this section prior to receiving relocation assistance �' Formatted: Highlight payments, may be eligible for relocation assistance payments as determined by Formatted: Highlight the director. 9.21.130 Violation = Penalty.,,' A. The violation of or failure to comply with. any provision of this :chapter is'declared to be unlawful. B. Any violation of any provision of this chapter is a class civil violation as provided for in SMC ; for which a. monetary penalty may be assessed and abatement may be required as provided therein... , PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON Council President Attest: Approved as to -form: City Clerk Mayor 19 Assistant City Attorney - Date 0 Page 1 of 1 Valerie Jackson From: Trautman, Paul [PTrautman @SpokaneCity.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 5:38 PM To: Marty Dickinson; Shogan, Joe; mannsnap @yahoo.com; mroloff @voaspokane.org; chris.mccabe @avistacorp.com; hadeyshel @hotmail.com; jim @kolva.xohost.com; chris @rencorprealty.com; gates @aimcomm.com; larrys @khco.com; rieckers @snapwa.org; terryl @cted.wa.gov; Barada, Christine; tomt @nwjustice.org; rfewel @inb.com; bethelamechurch @gwest.net; arlene patton @hud.gov; akirkpatrick @spokanecity.org; bwilliams @spokanecity.org; slihc @omnicast.net; mawatts @doc1.wa.gov; Allard, Jerrie; Ormsby.Timm @leg.wa.gov; slihc @omnicast.net; McLaughlin, Nancy; navej @foster.com; tobbyh @desautelhege.com Cc: Brum, Teresa Subject: Task Force Update for Wed 10/17 ordinance meeting Importance: High Attachments: 2007 -10 -16 draft Tenant Relocation ordinance.pdf, 2007 -10 -16 full text of comments.pdf Task Force — Several recent draft ordinance emails have had incomplete information. The attached files are the up -to -date versions of comments and materials regarding the draft tenant relocation ordinance. If possible, please replace previous versions of these Task Force comment and draft ordinance documents with the attached. Please note: ■ The attached draft relocation ordinance shows only those comments discussed at the Oct. 11 Task Force ordinance meeting. That meeting accomplished revisions only thru page 2. ■ The attached Task Force comments include all info I received to date. I apologize for the confusing formatting. Please let me know if your comments do not appear in this document. Chris Batten's comments were previously not included but added to the attached document. We will discuss your comments and the draft ordinance at the Task Force's meeting 8:00 AM tomorrow (Wednesday 10/17) in the Council Briefing Room, City Hall basement. Thank you again for your time and energy. Paul Trautman Hous[nc ?rog!a m ?.dmin Strator City of Spokane Community Development Dept. 808 W. Spokane Palis Blvd, #650, Spokane, WA 99201 phone: 509 -625 -6325 fax: 509-625-63 15 Protecting Spokane Kids From Lead -Based Paint - Lead Safe Spokane Cali 755 -7555 for more nformaeoni 10/17/2007 ORDINANCE NO. C- An ordinance regarding tenant relocation assistance; creating a new chapter of the Spokane Municipal Code designated as Chapter The City of Spokane does ordain: Chapter Tenant Relocation Assistance Purpose. Pursuant to RCW 59.18.440 cities may require property owners to provide reasonable relocation assistance for low income tenants upon the demolition, substantial rehabilitation or change of use of residential property, or upon the removal of use restrictions in assisted housing development. This chapter establishes the requirements and procedures for providing relocation assistance for low income tenants who are displaced as a result of demolition, substantial rehabilitation or change or elimination of residential use, or upon the removal of use restrictions in an assisted housing development. Definitions. The following words and phrases when used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise indicates, -shall have the following meanings: A. "Assisted housing development" means a multifamily rental housing development that either receives government assistance and is defined as federally assisted housing in RCW 59.28.020, or that receives other federal, state, or local government assistance and is subject to use restrictions. B. "Change or elimination of residential use" means the conversion of a dwelling unit to a nonresidential use or the elimination of a dwelling unit. . C. "City codes" means the Land use code, Uniform building Code and related standards, Uniform Housing Code, Washington State Energy Code, Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, and National Electrical Code, as adopted and amended by this code. D. "Demolition" means the intentional destruction on behalf of the owner of any dwelling unit or the relocation of an existing dwelling unit or units to another site. E. "Director" means the director of the department of or City Department of or the director's designee. F. "Displacement or Displaced" means that existing tenants must vacate the dwelling unit because of the demolition, substantial rehabilitation, change or elimination of residential use or the removal of use restrictions in an assisted housing development. For purposes of this chapter, "displacement" shall not include the permanent relocation of a tenant from one dwelling unit to another dwelling unit in the same building with the tenant's consent or the temporary relocation of a tenant for less than 72 hours. G. "Low income tenants" means tenants whose combined total household income per dwelling is at or below forty percent of the median income as adjusted.for family size, as determined by the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development for Spokane County or the Spokane Metropolitan Statistical Area. H. "Owner" means one or more persons, jointly or severally, in whom is vested: 1. All or part of the legal title to the property; or 2. All or part of the beneficial ownership and a right to resent use and en'oyment of the property I. "Substantial rehabilitation" means extensive structural repair or extensive remodeling which requires a building, electrical, plumbing, or mechanical permit, and which cannot be done with the tenant in occu O tion - substitute City definition of substantial rehab: d J. "Tenant" means any person who is entitled to occupy a dwelling unit primarily for living or dwelling purposes under a rental agreement and includes those persons who are considered to be tenants. under the State Residential For purposes of this chapter, "tenant" shall no include the owner of a dwelling unit or members of the owner's immediate family. Exceptions. This chapter shall not apply to the following: Relocation assistance payment amounts. A. Low income tenants who are displaced by demolition, substantial rehabilitation; change or elimination of a residential use, or removal of use restrictions in an assisted- housing development and who comply with the requirements of this chapter, shall be paid a relocation assistance payment in the amount up to $2,200 per dwelling unit. The amount of relocation assistance shall be adjusted annually by the percentage amount of change in the housing component of the Consumer Price Index as published b the United States De artment of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. B. The owner is responsible for payment in cash of one -half of the required relocation assistance per dwelling unit. The portion of the relocation assistance not payable by the owner shall be paid by the city up to a maximum of one -half the total payment amount. Permit issuance. The requirements of this chapter must be complied with prior to the issuance of a residential demolition permit or permits relating to substantial rehabilitation prior to the eviction of tenants for a change or elimination of residential use. Notification to tenants. The owner shall deliver to each tenant in each dwelling unit to be demolished, changed in use, substantially rehabilitated, or from which use restrictions are to be removed a ninety (90) day notice of the owner's intention to demolish, substantially rehabilitate, change the use of or remove use restrictions from the dwelling unit. The notice shall include a tenant income verification form and instructions that the tenants must complete and return the form to the director within 45 days from the date that the notice was mailed. The ninety day notification requirement under this section is separate from any notification requirement under the Landlord Tenant Act, Chapter 59.18 RCW. Tenant eligibility for relocation assistance. A. The completed information on the tenant income verification form shall include the names of all occupants of the dwelling unit, the total combined income of the occupants of the dwelling unit, and the total combined income of the occupants for the current calendar year. Any tenant who fails to return a completed tenant income verification form to the director within 45 days from the notification date shall not be eligible for relocation assistance, unless the tenant has requested and received a written extension from the director. B. Based on the information contained in the tenant income verification form, the director shall determine which tenants qualify as low income tenants and are therefore eligible to receive relocation assistance upon displacement. C. Within 15 days of the director's receipt of the signed relocation assistance forms from all tenants or within 15 days of the expiration of the tenants 45 -day period for submitting signed relocation assistance forms to the director, whichever occurs first, the director shall send to each tenant household who submitted a signed form and to the owner by both regular United States mail and certified mail, a notice stating whether the tenant qualifies as a low income tenant and is eligible for relocation assistance. The director shall send notice to the owner indicating all tenants deemed eligible for relocation assistance. D. Within fifteen days of the tenant being notified that he or she is eligible for relocation assistance, the tenant shall meet with a case worker assigned by the city to determine if there are any other available financial assistance programs in order to reduce the amount of the relocation, assistance provided under this chapter. E. Both the tenant and the owner may file an appeal with the hearing examiner, pursuant to SMC , of the director's determination of the tenant's eligibility for relocation assistance. The hearing examiner must issue a decision within 30 days from the date the appeal was filed. Owner's contribution to relocation assistance. Within 10 days after receipt by the owner of the director's notice of tenant eligibility, the owner shall pay to the director one -half of the total relocation assistance cost. If an appeal is filed pursuant to SMC , the owner's contribution is due within 10 days of the hearing examiner's decision. The total relocation assistance shall be calculated based on the number of units occupied by tenant households who are determined by the director to be eligible for relocation assistance, as modified by any decisions by the hearing examiner concerning eligibility for relocation assistance, multiplied by the payment amount established in SMC Payment of relocation assistance. Upon receipt of the owner's share of relocation assistance costs, the director shall send total relocation assistance payments to eligible tenants. The director may request verification that the tenant will be displaced by the demolition, substantial rehabilitation or change in or elimination of residential use. Relocation assistance funds may only be used by the tenant for actual physical moving casts and expenses, and advance payments required for moving into a new residence such as the cost of first and last month's rent and security and damage deposits, utility connection fees and deposits, rental application fees, and pet deposit fees. Any relocation assistance funds not expended shall be returned to the owner and the City in equal amounts. Appeal of hearing examiner decision. A decision of the hearing examiner under SMC is the final city decision. The decision of the hearing examiner may be appealed to superior court by filing a petition within 10 calendar days following the date of the decision. Appeals to superior court are made by application for a writ of certiorari, writ of prohibition or writ of mandamus. Eviction protection. A. During the period from the date that the owner provides notice to the tenants to the time that relocation assistance payments are paid to eligible tenants, the owner shall not: 1. Evict, harass or intimidate tenants into vacating their units for the purpose of avoiding or diminishing application of this chapter including unreasonable rent increase or 2. Reduce the services to any tenant; or 3. Materially increase or change the obligations of any tenant. B. Low income tenants who are evicted or vacate as a result of subsections A1, 2 and 3 of this section prior to receiving relocation assistance payments, may be eligible for relocation assistance payments as determined by the director. 9.21.130 Violation - Penalty. A. The violation of or failure to comply with any provision of this chapter is declared to be unlawful. B. Any violation of any provision of this chapter is a class civil violation as provided for in SMC ' for which a monetary penalty may be assessed and abatement may be required as provided therein. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON , 2007. Attest: City Clerk Mayor Council President Approved as to form: Assistant City Attorney Date Effective Date Gkp s J3w7Te,�-, I assume that a good number of task force members, if not the majority support some form of a relocation plan. So please take my comments as they are intended, though they may be in direct conflict they are offered to be both constructive and informative. Suffice it to say I am philosophically opposed to this ordinance. It in no way takes into consideration the fundamental property rights of building owners. I have a very difficult time supporting something which is reactionary and punitive rather than proactive and meaningful. The reality is that social services and our governments have failed these people and in many cases they have themselves contributed to their own.lot in life. Is it any one individuals responsibility to carry this burden, or any portion there of? Because the individuals in question did not meet the "criteria," virtually every social service agency indicated that they could not and would not assist the majority of residents. Why then should we assume this to be the responsibility of an individual property owner? I truly believe that our efforts would be better used at trying to cure the cause rather than treat the symptom. We not only need affordable housing, but also safe housing which meets a minimum housing standard and affords not only residents, but also neighbors a sense of security. I am deeply concerned that this ordinance could have the opposite effect, thereby reducing the amount of affordable housing. I am also. concerned that rather than make the. necessary improvements which are often many years overdue, building owners vyill be forced into maintaining our current inventory of "affordable housing" which does not meet any acceptable standard for living conditions or life safety. I believe that the "call for the question" is premature and should have been deferred until such time as we could discuss the possible incentives for creating new, sustainable workforce and low income housing. This discussion could have added incredible value to the process. For example, should a landlord who is taking a substandard building, renovating it and thereby bringing it up to code be effectively penalized even though 30% of the projected units are set aside for low to moderate income tenants? This seems entirely backwards to me. At no point in this process have I been given even a single reason to take pause and give further consideration to the possibility let alone the feasibility of doing additional low income housing in the future. After reviewing several times, as drafted the ordinance does not actually require the tenant to vacate the premises at any time prior to having received assistance or after. It would seem that assistance only be available for those who vacate in accordance with the notice to vacate. It should not be the case where the landlord must proceed with an unlawful detainer action and forcibly remove the Tenant while still having to pay 50% of the cost of the "relocation ". It would seem that this situation may be resolved in several ways: 1) Requiring funds to be reimbursable only and 2) Funds be paid directly to the service provider 3) the landlord paying it's portion of the relocation expense upon verification that the unit has been vacated. For those tenants who do not vacate and who are legally evicted, does the city pay 50% of the costs associated with the unlawful detainer? How do we deal with the issue of "reasonable accommodation "? It seems to me that while the current RCW requires a 20 day notice to vacate on any month to month tenancy, any extension thereof should also take into consideration the reasonableness of the extended period of time. The amount of the required relocation payment should be capped at a reasonable amount, $2200 does not seem to be reasonable by Spokane standards. Would it be unreasonable to suggest that the figure be tied to the then current rent being paid by the Tenant? First, last and a stipend for moving expenses. Are we to suggest that someone paying $225 per month should be allowed to move into a unit that is $500 per month? This in my mind raises several points: 1) the reason the unit was "affordable" was probably due to the condition of the building, which was most likely the reason for the displacement, this seems to be a circular argument 2) what is the sustainability of the tenants' continued occupancy? Should they rent a unit outside of their means? What accountability does the City have that people are being placed into suitable housing. Is anyone required to perform HQS inspections prior to using public funds? If the Landlord is being required to pay the deposit, are they required to do a deposit disposition and reimburse the tenant a second time for this expense? What requirement is being made of the Tenant not to damage the unit or leave trash upon vacating? The definition of "Demolition" is vague and does not take into consideration acts of God or other circumstances outside of the control of the property owner. The director should be required to provide the necessary documentation and forms for relocation assistance. This must be standardized and simplified for all involved. While it does say "shall' meet with a social worker, it should be clear that the tenants must participate in the process and that if they do not they will not be eligible for assistance. How do we take into consideration that the building owner may very well be loosing a considerable amount each month due to operating expenses exceeding income? How do we propose to mitigate the expenses as tenants trickle out of the building further diminishing the rental income while increasing the net loss? Does the City purpose to pay 50% of the operating deficit? This should be taken into consideration and there should be a clause allowing the owner of the building to declare a financial hardship which would allow the Landlord to forego participation. Some would suggest that this be the problem of the developer. However in many cases this is a situation where the current ownership has struggled for years and has simply either given up or determined to take a new direction. Mayor's Affordable Housing Task Force Tenant Relocation Ordinance 10/10/2007 Full Text of Comments Cindy Algeo It's imperative that the City of Spokane adopt a tenant relocation assistance ordinance. The recent and current displacement would not have been nearly as challenging if such an ordinance had been in place. We—the Spokane community—have an obligation to assist low income and vulnerable residents when they are being displaced due to redevelopment. The ordinance should clearly spell out our obligations. The City of Spokane must take the lead in covering half the costs of relocation. While not all developers will agree that they should bear the other half of the cost, they will be more likely to support this if they know the. City is an equal financial partner. We all, to varying degrees, favor redevelopment. Relocating displaced residents is simply one of the costs of redevelopment. Tenants should be given at least a 90-iay notice. I would prefer a 120- to 180 -day notice. The longer the notice period is, the easier it will be for the nonprofit community to assist the tenants to find new homes, and the costs of relocation may actually be reduced! To ensure that tenants continue to pay the rent after they are given notice, the ordinance should state that tenants will be eligible for relocation assistance only if they remain current with their rent. Finally, I would like to see 'low income tenants" defined as tenants whose combined total household income per dwelling is at or below 50 percent, or at least 40 percent, rather than the 30 percent that has been proposed. Marty Dickinson Please consider the following comments: Definitions B. It is unclear whether the definition is intended to include buildings that are vacated and closed for economic hardship or life- safety reasons with no reuse of the building to immediately follow (dark buildings). 1 would assert that those buildings should not be applicable, and to subject building owners that wrongfully seek to avoid the relocation payments be declaring the closure as being for financial or life -safety reasons in bad faith, issuance of a building permit within 180 days Of closure would rescind the waiver and result in payment of the relocation funds to the City plus a 25% premium. F. "Displacement" should also not include closure for economic hardship or life -safety reasons as conditioned in 8 above. It should also not require relocation assistance for relocation wdhin the same building, as that discourages building owners from undertaking staged renovations where a majority of the tenants are retained in the same building, only relocated to an upgraded unit. That phasing should be incented, not penalized. H. The definition of Owner should be strictly the persons or entities holding title to the property and not partners in partnerships, members in LLCs and/or shareholders in corporations, to avoid imputing personal liability to those individuals for relocation assistance and other obligations of the ordinance. Exceptions Add. • "This chapter shall not apply to buildings closed and remaining closed by the Owner for a period of six (6) months or longer for reasons of economic hardship (revenues not meeting operating and capital expenditures and debt service requirements) or material life -safety deficiencies. Tenant Eligibility for Relocation Assistance E. The ordinance should establish a deadline that the tenant or owner file any appeal of the determination of relocation assistance within fifteen(15) days of mailing of the determination, so as to not allow the appeals to surface late in the process and delay vacating the building. Also add, "Any tenant in material breach of a lease agreement (such as for non-payment of rent or violation of tenants obligations under the Landlord Tenant Ad, RCW 59.18.130 in which case the tenant . remains in default and the Owner has in good faith issued a notice of default to tenant shall be ineligible for relocation assistance until and unless such time as the default is cured." Payment of Relocation Assistance What assurance is there that assistance will be used by tenants for eligible purposes and not spent unwisely, leaving the tenant destitute and unable to complete relocation? I have thoughts about the reasonableness of the $2,200 baseline relocation amount but have not voiced them herein. Marty Dickinson General comments: The enactment of this ordinance may have a few unintended —and detrimental— consequences. First, landlords may chose not to rent to low- income tenants when faced with a choice between low- income applicants and other applicants. Assuming the rental income from both types of tenants would be the same, the potential obligation to pay $1,100 of relocation costs (and incur the soft costs necessary to comply with the ordinance) to a low- income tenant likely would sway the landlord to choose the other applicant. If this assumption is correct, the ordinance would promote rental practices that do not encourage the development of mixed - income projects. Second, the ordinance may cause certain buildings to fall further into disrepair, and thereby endanger the health, safety and welfare of low- income tenants. Certain properties have become affordable to low-income tenants primarily because the living conditions are such that the buildings only attract tenants with few other housing options. The Otis sounds like it is such a building. It seems that the owners of these buildings forego desirable repairs and improvements because the rental income from the buildings is not substantially greater than the buildings' operating costs (e.g utilities, insurance, debt service payments). By imposing a financial condition on a landlord's ability to rehabilitate such a building, landlords may determine that the additional costs outweigh the benefit of making improvements. Third, the ordinance would provide an incentive for landlords to increase rents and /or not renew leases during the months before a building is to be rehabilitated or sold. (Note that the existence of the ordinance likely would effect the fair market value of an apartment building to the extent low - income individuals were tenants of the building. In certain circumstances, a landlord may be able to increase the value of its building by transferring it as a vacant building.) The ordinance would not apply to building that is vacant on the date otherwise would be required to be notified of a pending displacement. Therefore, a landlord should be expected to undertake a cost- benefit analysis to determine whether it is more economical to forego rental income prior to rehabilitating or selling a building, or to pay relocation costs pursuant to the ordinance. If a landlord opts for the former, that action may result in tenants being displaced earlier than they might be displaced if the ordinance is not enacted. Fourth, the ordinance is not limited in scope to buildings of the type that have appeared in the press lately. From a legal standpoint, that may be impossible. The ordinance will apply to all landlords within Spokane, including people renting single - family homes. One can imagine a situation in which a landlord wishes to rehabilitate and sell a single - family home being rented to students. The landlord would be required to comply with the ordinance and would be obligated — together with the City —to pay the students' relocation expenses. That does not seem to be an appropriate use of City funds or an appropriate constraint on landlords. (It also may discourage landlords from renting to students.) Specific comments: 1. "Residential unit" should be changed to "dwelling unit" where it appears in the definition of "Change or elimination of residential use." 2. In the definition of "Demolition,' the word "destruction" should be replaced with 'intentional destruction by or on behalf of the owner." This intended to distinguish from destruction due to casualty (e.g. fire or flooding). 3. In the first sentence of the definition of 'Displacement," insert "or'Displaced" after "Displacement" (since both words are used in the chapter) and insert ", or removal of use restrictions applicable to an assisted housing development.' In the second sentence of the definition, the 72 -hour restriction on involuntary relocations within the same building appears to be unreasonably restrictive. What public policy is furthered by requiring a landlord to make relocation payments to a tenant when, in fact, the landlord has caused the tenant to be relocated? Left unchanged, the ordinance might provide an incentive for a tenant to refuse relocation within a building if that refusal triggers a cash payment to the tenant. That does not further the public policy of keeping low- income tenants housed. 4. In the definition of "low income tenants," replace "United States Department of Housing and Urban Development" with "Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development' (which is what the statute requires). Also, consider what period of time is appropriate for purposes of the income "snapshot ": is it the date on which the owner provides the required notice under the ordinance, or the prior calendar year, or the previous six -month period? This can have subtle consequences. 5. The only threshold for determining "substantial' in the definition of "substantial rehabilitation" is whether the tenant is required to vacate the dwelling unit. One can imagine simple repairs (e.g. a repair to plumbing or heating systems) that may render a dwelling unit temporarily uninhabitable. The ordinance should not be targeted at these repairs. Rather, it seems that the real problem to be addressed is the rehabilitation of an aged "affordable" dwelling unit into a new "market" rate unit. Perhaps a "change in use" concept could be introduced in this definition so that it applied to conversions of rental dwelling housing units to home -ownership units (e.g. conversion of an apartment to a condominium) or to non - residential units. This concept partially is addressed in the definition "Change or elimination of residential use." 6. In the definition of "tenant," delete the balance of the sentence after the words "Chapter 59.18 RCW.' The exceptions contained in RCW 59.18.040(3) describe housing arrangements that have not given rise to the challenges currently faced in Spokane. The cross - reference to RCW 67.28.180(1) also is incorrect. 7. Delete the section entitled "Applicability." It is redundant and basically repeats the definition of "displacement.' 8. As exceptions, insert the exceptions set forth in RCW 57.18.440(7). 9. In clause A of the section entitled "Relocation assistance payment amounts," delete all words between "displaced" and "and" in the first sentence. This language is redundant in light of the defined term "displacement." Also, clause A requires payment of a fixed amount. However, the ordinance also suggests that the $2,200 may be a "cap" on the relocation assistance that can be paid. It should be clarified in this clause that the $2,200 is a cap be including the phrase "maximum" before the word amount in each place the word "amount" appears. 10. The required timing under the section entitled "Permit issuance" is not consistent with the balance of the ordinance. It may be appropriate to state that the City will no provide a demolition permit (in the case of a planned demolition) or a building permit (in the case of a planned substantial rehabilitation) with respect to a building containing dwelling units for rent until the owner has provided evidence that it complied with the notification requirements under the section entitled "Notification to tenants." 11. The section entitled 'Notification to tenants" is not limited in scope. Therefore, all landlords in Spokane — including people renting single- family residences —will be required to notify tenants of the plans to undertake any of the activities triggering a "displacement" within the meaning of the ordinance. This will require education (to advise landlords) and enforcement (to maintain compliance) efforts by the City. Also, the 90-day notice period appears to be too long. This is especially true under the circumstances when the displacement might be triggered by an event that has rendered the building uninhabitable during the 90 -days before the substantial rehabilitation can be commenced (e.g. a flood or fire damage). 12. In clause A of the section entitled "Tenant eligibility for relocation assistance," the first sentence should be clarified to state that tenants are responsible for completing income verification forms. 13. Language should be included in the section entitled "Tenant eligibility for relocation assistance' stating that a tenants ability to receive relocation assistance is conditioned on that tenant remaining current on its obligations under the lease with the landlord, including the obligations to pay rent and not to commit waste (or to damage) the premises. 14. The section entitled "Owner's contribution to relocation assistance" appears to require a payment by the owner before the amount of that payment can be determined (assuming the $2,200 is intended as a "cap" and not a mandatory entitlement). This is contradictory to the following section (entitled "Payment of relocation assistance "). These two sections should be combined. 15. In the section entitled "Payment of relocation assistance," consider whether it is more appropriate for the City to make direct payments to the new landlord and to the moving company. This would help ensure that any subsidy is being used for its intended purpose. A small dollar amount could be paid directly to the tenant in cash to cover incidental costs. Also, consider whether it would be appropriate for the City and a landlord to share in the costs of moving a tenant cross-country if the tenant decided to relocate in Seattle (or in Florida, for that matter). 16. The section entitled "Eviction protection" may not be necessary. It appears to be addressing the perceived evil that a landlord may attempt to cause a tenant to vacate a dwelling unit as an attempt to avoid paying relocation assistance. However, as drafted, it appears that the ordinance requires payment of relocation expenses regardless of how soon the tenant vacates a unit after the "displacement" notice is received by that tenant. 17. New language should be added to the section entitled "Violation - Penalty" that allows the City to impose a penalty if it determines that a new landlord has obtained relocation assistance with respect to fees and charges the new landlord does not customary impose on other new tenants. While this practice may occur, the City should have some language in the ordinance that attempts to dissuade landlords from increasing the amounts of security deposits, pet deposits, last month's rent and other charges merely because the City and the old landlord are obligated to pay such fees and charges. Marty Dickinson & Forwarded Comments Regarding the draft relocation ordinance, please consider calculating what we've averaged in relocation costs for the current relocations (NM, Commercial and Otis) and adjust the $2200 downward to reflect actual Spokane costs. If Seattle's number is around $2500, then the equivalent number for Spokane (based on cost of living) would be around $1667. We don't want to provide a disincentive to renovating and upgrading substandard buildings. Also, the payment should not go directly to the individual but to an agency. Consider ways that a developer could 'opt out' of this program by successfully relocating a certain percentage of tenants (80 % ?) into living conditions that are a substantial upgrade over previous conditions. Finally, we don't want to create a future obligation for city taxpayers that could be without limit. Consider ways that we might build in annual review, limits on the annual dollar amount coming from the City on this, sources of revenue that we might pay the city obligation from (1 can't think of anything other than maybe a Historic Renovation tax credit surcharge or maybe a building permit fee 'relocation fee' surcharge on each permit sold, etc) .... it would be very nice to tie some revenue source to this new obligation. Jim Kolva I have the following observations. The ordinance does not differentiate among buildings being torn down for parking lots, buildings being renovated for upgraded market rate housing, or buildings being renovated for upgraded low income housing. It seems that if housing is being provided, particularly for low income, there should be some incentive. Likewise for low to moderate income market rate housing. It seems that must used a carrot and stick approach. Further, if a building is unsafe and a fire trap, it seems that we are not supporting the responsible owner who desires to create better living conditions. I think that some building owners will see this ordinance as onerous, particularly those who want to improve buildings and retain their residential use. I don't want to see buildings tom down because the costs of relocation and renovation break the back of the owners. I also have reservations about handing money to people. l had a conversation with one of my street acquaintances who got moved out of the New Madison. He appreciated the beer money and said he would be moving on once he had spent it. But, I wouldn't be surprised to see him on the street this winter. Ray Rieckers: I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft relocation ordinance. Generally, I approve of the ordinance as drafted and believe it is good legislation. That said I believe the 30% income limitation is too low. The ordinance will affect people Citywide, including single people and families. I believe eligibility for relocation assistance should be set at 40% of median income adjusted for family size. SNAP's provides shelter to many homeless families. Based on our experience and looking at income guidelines, a household of three at 40% of median income can have a maximum income of $1,726 a month before taxes are taken out. Under HUD affordability guidelines a rent is affordable at not more than 30% of a household's monthly income. In the case of a 3 person household right at the 40% level means they can afford a maximum rent of $517 per month including utilities. The Fair Market Rent for a two bedroom unit is $634 including utilities. If displaced due to redevelopment, a low income family with income below 40% of median will be hard pressed to pay moving expenses, rent, and deposit all in one month. They will need help or may become homeless. It seems appropriate and reflective of our community's values to include households making less than 40 °k of median income as eligible for relocation assistance. Joe Shogan Paul, I would make the following changes to the Proposed Relocation Ordinance: NOTIFICATION TO TENANTS — Add this sentence: The Owner shall provide a list of current tenants to the Director at the time of the ninety (90) day notice. PAYMENT OF RELOCATION ASSISTANT — Make this change at the end of the first sentence: instead of 'eligible tenants" change to "directly to the applicable landlords or agencies." Thank you, Joe Shogan Larry Soehren Some general as well as specific thoughts. First the general items: 1) Tenants need to be in good standing at the time of notice, and continue in good standing until they vacate. In other words, rents must be current, they can't trash the units, etc. 2) What happens if a property's HAP or other subsidy contract is not renewed through no fault of the owner? (Think about the "HUD funds moving to Commerce Dept." issue). I believe that the ordinance as drafted would imply that they have to pay assistance. I disagree with that position. 3) 1 think this whole ordinance is written against a backdrop of downtown low income housing. I understand that it would apply citywide. Further, 1 suspect, as written, it would apply to the owner of a single family home who rents to low income persons or families. Is everyone prepared to take on the "retirement fund" owner, and administer these payments one home at at time? Now, the specific paragraphs: 1) Exceptions: What about fire or other casualty /destruction? I doubt this would be an insurable or coverable expense if the building is destroyed in whole or in part. This applies to both long term rebuilds and the short term relocation in whole or in part as mentioned in "Definitions F ". 2) I'm going to stand by my original suggestion of a 45 day notice period. 3) The "Tenant eligibility...." paragraph, item B, would seem to indicate the possibility of more than one tenant in a unit benefiting, yet the amount is capped per unit. Confusion. I think the confusion is because the paragraph moves from individual occupants of single units to overall occupants of the building. I think this needs some clarification. 4) 1 have a huge problem with the notion of paying each tenant the maximum amount and hoping they pay it back. That's a dream world that won't match reality. I think of Jim Kolva's beer drinking friend example. Once its gone, it's gone. I suspect its written this way so the City will limit its administrative expense. But if it's an outright grant, let's call it that I doubt that will fly, however. Bev Gates [comments summarized by staff] ■ Definition of "Owner" — Add "3. Assigned Representative" to the list of owners. ■ Change the amount of relocation payment to $_1,800. ■ Consider reducing the notice period to 60 days. Also, consider combining the 90- day relocation notice period with the Landlord Tenant Act required notice period for a total notice period not exceeding 90 days. ■ Payment of relocation assistance — Add "Money should be given directly to new landlord, utility company, etc." There is no guarantee the tenant will use the funds for relocation. ■ Eviction protection — Add "4. Tenants in violation of rental agreement or delinquent in rent are subject to eviction." From: Tom Tremaine [mailto:TomT @nMusdCe.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 8:18 AM To: Shogan, Joe Subject: RE: Relocation Ordinance Relocation Assistance Payment Amounts. A. Low income tenants who are displaced by demolition, substantial rehabilitation, change or elimination of a residential use, or removal of a use restrictions in an assisted - housing development and who comply with the requirements of this chapter, shall be eligible for relocation assistance up to the amount of $2,200 per dwelling unit.... B. The amount of relocatio» assistance paid for each eligible tenant shall be the actual amount of. 1. Advance payments required for moving into a new residence such as first and last month's rent and security and damage deposits. 2. Utility connection fees and deposits. 3. Actual physical moving costs and expenses. C The owner is responsible ... Tenant Eligibility For Relocation Assistance. F The tenant must be and remain current in the payment of rent to be eligibility for relocation assistance. Provided, however, that this requirement shall not apply if the landlord and tenant have entered into an agreement to reduce or waive the tenant's rent payments, or if the tenant's rent obligation is reduced or excused under applicable local or state law. Payment of Relocation Assistance. The director shall create and distribute to each eligible tenant verification forms that shall be completed by landlords, utility providers and otber vendors which shall. 1. List the types of costs and expenses that are eligible for relocation assistance payment; 2. Indicate the amount required; 3. Contain a verifying statement attesting that the information given is true and correct and that payments received pursuant to submission of the form will be applied only fo the costs and expenses listed; and 4. Provide space for the printed name and signature of the payee, or his or her agent. Eligible tenants shall provide the director with verification forms from new landlords, utility providers and movers indicating the amount and type of payment required. Upon receipt of such forms and the owner's share of relocation assistance costs, the director shall send relocation assistance payments to the eligible tenant's new landlord, utility company or mover. Where the eligible tenant intends to move him or herself, relocation 0 assistance payments shall also be made for the actual cost of vehicle rental and a reasonable amount for fuel. Whenever possible, such payments should be made directly to the rental company or fuel provide Where this manner of payment is impracticable or will cause significant delay in-the eligible tenant's move, such payments shall be made directly to the eligible tenant. -In the event the costs and expenses listed on the eligible tenant's verification forms exceeds the total amount of relocation assistance available, the eligible tenant shall be given the opportunity to prioritize payments. Any relocation assistance funds not expended shall be returned to the owner and the City in equal amounts. Joe — I am in Seattle tomorrow and won't be able to attend the meeting. 1 am attaching my proposed edits to the draft ordinance in the hope that you will have a chance to look at them and we might have at least a brief discussion. My edits would add a layer of complication to the process with the city making vendor payments. However, this process serves two very distinct purposes. For those who fear low income people will take-the money and blow it, this provides some assurance it will be used as intended. The real purpose is, for all those who are receiving some type of benefit (SSI, TANF, GAU), the direct payments to vendors should eliminate any possibility that those funds would be counted as income and result in a reduction in the relocating tenant's benefit payment. If you get the chance, let me know what you think. AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE JECTIVES October 25, 2007 M Marty Dickinson From: Andrew Rolwes Sent: Thursday, August 23, 200711:06 AM To: 'tbrum @spokanecity.org; 'jallard @spokanecity.org; 'sashe @spokanecity.org' Cc: Marty Dickinson Subject: Downtown SROs Hello Teresa, Jerri, and Susan, The Downtown Spokane Partnership conducted an informal downtown housing survey in October 2006 and determined that at the time there were 285 Single Room Occupancy units in the downtown service area. This number was part of a larger total of 2,094 units in the downtown service area that were considered low-income housing based on a visual inspection of the property. This included units ranging in size from SROs and efficiencies up to three bedroom units (of which there were thirteen). The numbers have no doubt changed in the past year. can provide an excel spreadsheet for low- income units on request. Best regards, - Andrew HOWNTOWN S P 0 K A N F Andrew Rolwes Phone: (509) 456 -0580 x109 Public Policy & Parking Manager Fax: (509) 747 -3127 Downtown Spokane Partnership Business Improvement District 211 N. Wall St., Suite 300 E -mail: ARolwesat , owntownSpokane.net Spokane, WA 99201 Web Site: www.DowntownS okane.net 8/24/2007 -WE I- -'"II . JSARna- . k � y r milk' ��,,, 5 `+�� ba, .7i+''k'�sa/' %v�C�"�'��" `3n '',.s 3rn F.,..t-4^:Y ''K. M,: ":i. Al :•..'f e�,^i,.. .,. .nr..... ..:. 1 i. .Ki: t.; :. +rr, .uP'tlP•'vki'1. ,. >:. 's x , -, s n �.� " ^:,. Y.e a; r ... :_, .,.y. •..�+ :..'...,, -. %. ':.2...,, A A' M '� i'.: .T - -'.; {` .... �,`... ..,•.. .._:. , ..n.... +'? _.. . ,.... .:. .r.< . ; ., ... _... -N e :'..t- �' .,`+'.j+. . t`' .. . ..., 53:1 .,w {, ..:� . .- ,': w'.,.f ti ..C',�- /f,,,F. ♦ ... :' .... $.. i h' '.. .,n F. '�+, ;a S� a'1+ _ i ,:+ ... ..T Y.4'«e'�i- ^�{R - ��'*k` G* Y�^3T', -.IsFk "F L +;, v >;EZ. Y-- .... ..;- ..T_ Flr Y! <.. �f....:+n'11:. W r S J° ...,U{ 1. P..it f' A. i S J_..s'.:inir. 'lG.,Lj 5 ?l �. G. - dTOtBI —c, ?# ..{,4. ,K.'�'a^t'Y ya' C c'S.4 .2, rl t'N A i.kdit E vY. W ?N +. Y•'y i k Y `� - �' r. i r ..; :5-� - '�, . ,'F �.x'4 } �f )1 .{ t.'� �R ..2,:n t ,>4 QAf . -C1 7 4 ,, " ner/ Nlatla' er �xtar Bits ,r �t<: ....� ,,......,.$.k ,, Lat�I� �1��. ,< „t. , rl, �ert�l�tn�., � ��51i��r�6�a 902 W 1st Ave Met Apts 35192.0508 Apts Low Kiemle & Hagoo, Lorraine Brooks 838 -6541 1 1111 W 1st Ave 35192.1209 Apts 49 49 SRO 0 0 Low Yes - Income, Historic Otis Assn, Limited 44 Rent exmpt Partnership, 990 -3999 expires 1115 W 1st Ave 99201 2 2006/2008 1021 W 1st Ave Madison Apts 35192.1101 Apts 0 Low Spokane Partners LLC 122 S Monroe St Ste 208 3 9.9201 501 W 1st St City Place Condos 35191.2402 Condos 52 40 12 0 Median NA NA Multi Executive Court LLC family Tomlinson Black exmpt Management, 107 S. expires Howard #600, 99201 2017 4 anticipated 229 W 2nd Ave Avondale 35191.1101 Apts 26 26 0 0 Low Yes - Income, SNAP, 2116 E. 1 st Ave, 26 Rent Spokane, 99201, 456 -7111 5 325 W 2nd Ave Washington 35191.1001 Apts /Corn 53 53 SRO 0 0 Low Yes -I Income, LWD Enterprises LLC 6 1 Rent 1325 W 2nd Ave 99201 811 W 2nd Ave River City Lofts 35192.2304 Condos 8 0 0 8 Median NA NA Multi River City Development family LLC (Ryan Daley), 421 exmpt W. Riverside #470, expires 99201951 -0341 2017 7 anticipated 29 W 2nd Ave Merlin 35191.1303. Apts 32 18 SRO 14 0 Low NA Yes Spokane Dream Center Church & Ministry PO 8 Box 14761 99214 301- W 2nd Ave Sunnyside 35191.1005 Apts 21 2 SRO, 2 0 Low NA Daniel and Melissa Dailey 17 Eff 1019 W 7th Ave 99204 9 111 W 3rd Ave Hope House (Del 35191.1504 Apts 25 17 8 Low Yes Income, Yes VOA, Rusty Barnett, 455 - Mar ) 10 Rent 2886 410 W 3rd Ave Danmore 35191.2908 Apts 36 36 0 0 Low Yes -1 S G Morin 410 W 3rd Ave 11 99201 M%wditn 9%sJ1%aW 317 W 4th Ave Connell 35191.3802 Apts. 23 8 14 1 Low Yes -3 likely Spokane housing Ventures, Jane Auld, 715 E. Sprague 4102 232 -0200 12 x204 1527 W Ave Maplehurst 25241.4004 Apts 20 Low The W Group Inc PO Box 14th 873335 Vancouver WA 13 98687 320 W 5th Ave Guthrie 35191.3807 Apts 7 0 7 0 Low Yes - likely Yes Spokane Housing 2 Ventures, Jane Auld, 715 E. Sprague 4102 232 -0200 14 x204 324 W 5th Ave Locust 35191.3807 Apts 12 0 12 0 Low NA likely Yes Spokane Housing Ventures, Jane Auld, 715 E. Sprague # 102 232 -0200 15 x204 507 W 5th Ave Rennwood Court 35191.4304 Apts 30 Median J &J Diamond, 3161 Elliott Ave, Seattle, 98121, G &B 888- 723 -2110 16 519 W 5th Ave Southside 35191.4302 Apts 6 Low Renncorp 455 -3770 Christopher and Ivy Batten 2307 E Altamont 99202 17 707 W 5th Ave Cooper- George 35192.5221 Assisted 143 42 55 46 Low Yes Cooper George Partners living 1 3131 Elliott Ave #500 18 1 1 Seattle WA 98121 1117 W 5th Ave Jefferson - The 35192.4302 Apts 11 Median Gates Realty 838 -5823 Urban Holdings LLC 22844 SE 21st St 19 Sammamish WA 98075 1203 W Ave Resident Court 35192.4211 Apts 43 25 11 7 Low Yes SNAP, 2116 E. 1 st Ave, 15th Spokane, 99201, 456 -7111 20 1226 W 5th Ave Wilshire 35192.3911 Apts 9 0 8 1 Low Marshall Gates 1226 W 21 15th Ave 99204 1304 W 5th Ave Sky View 35192.4005 Apts 12 0 12 Low Yes L &B & K &S Johnson 22 1 4510 S Freya St 99223 1305 W 5th Ave Casaloma 35192.4103 Apts 5 Low 218 -3221 Renee Lytle 23 11305 W 5th Ave 99204 1312 W Ave 35192.4011 Apts 6 Median Manhart Investments. 15th LLC, P.O.Box 6635, 24 99217 1324 W Ave Highland Hall Apts 12 Low Karen Cogswell 142 Tree 15th 135192.4007 Frog Ln Santa Cruz CA 25 195060 1403 W 15th Ave Cedar 125241.5601- Condos 12 Median Multiple 26 5615 Mw •ns�na 214 1 W 16th Ave Southcliff Plaza 35191.5615 Apts 27 Median Cae Cha Sung 214 W 6th 27 Ave 99204 326 W 6th Ave The Kempis 35191.4510 Apts 27 Median Historic Wells & Co, 1325 W. 1st exmpt #300, 99201, 624 -8050 expires 28 2014 518 W 6th Ave Shasta 35191.4309 Apts 8 3 3 2 Low Yes -1 James & Maralyn Bertis 29 520 S Walnut St 99204 615 W 6th Ave 35191.5301 Apts 5 Low Donald and Susan Lektorich 1515 10th St 30 1 Coronado CA 92118 704 W 6th Ave Franklin Hall 35192.5219 Co -Op Apts 44 6 Median Franklin Hall Apt Assoc 520 S Walnut St Spokane 31 WA 99204 707 W 6th Ave Marycliff Manor 35192.5723 Apts 22 Median . Marycliff Manor Homeowners Assoc 707 W 6th Ave Spokane WA. 32 99204 726 W 6th Ave Mayfair 35192.5223 Co -Op Apts 11 Median Brain Royer Community Frameworks 484 -6733 33 1016 W 6th Ave 35192.4409 Apts 12 Low Denver Nordal 508 S 34 Monroe #2199204 1111 W 6th Ave Madison Terrace 35192.5627 Condos 20 Median Madison Terrace Condos Homeowners Assoc 1111 W 6th Ave Spokane WA 35 199204 1211 W Ave 35192.4904 Apts 4 Low Bruce Clow 2105 NW 16th 32nd Portland OR 97215 36 1217 W Ave Janosky 35192.4903 Apts 14 0 12 2 Low NA Mathew Lee 2912 Escala 16th Cir San Diego CA 92108 37 1220 W 16th Ave La Nelda 35192.4208 Apts 6 Median Robert Olsen 1311 W 6th 38 Ave 99204 1223 W 6th Ave Dijkman 35192.4902 Apts 9 Median Mathew Lee 2912 Escala Cir San Diego CA 92108 39 1310 W 6th Ave Colony Park 35192.4107 Apts 30 1 3 24&23- Low Yes - Greg Doesburg, 1318 E. 40 bedrm 6 37th, 99203,624 -8915 1311 W 6th Ave Los Carralitos 35192.5002 Apts 8 1 1 6 Median NA Robert and Joanne Olsen 1311 W 6th Ave 99204 41 1319 W 6th Ave J &D 142 135192.5001 Apts 74 Median 1 Jerry Edwards PO box 96 1 1 1 1 1 Tucson AZ 85702 "wMan sA agg 1428 W Ave 25241.4204 Apts 4 Median. Scott & Susan Lambdin 1 16th 313 Hanford PI Upland 43 CA 91766 1514 W 6th Ave 25241.4312 Apts 4 Low Dan & Kelly Brammer P.O. Box 88 Newman 44 Lake WA 99025 1528 W 6th Ave Colonial South 25241.4310 Apts 6 0 4 2 Low Lief Tangvald PO Box 45 13069199223 1204- W 6th Ave Bishop Terrace 35192.4210 Apts 29 Low Grant & Marlene Van De 1206 Walker 23666 Pesaro 46 Laguna Hills CA 92653 1301, W 6th Ave 35192.5003 Apts 12 Median Russet Hill Apts LLC 1306 47 2006 E 24th 99203 928 W 7th Ave Hanson 35193.5307 Apts 7 Low Jerry and Sue Newman 48 928 W 7th Ave 99204 212 W 7th Ave City Terrace 35191.4906 Apts 8 Low 747 -4604 F.A.T Family LLC # 1 816 W Francis, PMB 204 Ave Spokane 49 WA 99205 524 W 7th Ave Roosevelt 35194.5206 Apts 62 Median 747 -1414 Roosevelt LLC 1918 S Post St 99203 50 620 W 7th Ave Park Terrace 35195.5700G Condos 32 Median Park Terrace Condo Homeowners Assoc 620 W 7th Ave Box A Spokane 51 WA 99204 700 W 7th Ave 700 W 7th Condos 35195.7001- Condos 63 Median . 700 Seventh Conommium 7015 Assoc 700 W 7th Ave #807 Spokane WA 99204 52 920 W 7th Ave 35193.5306 Apts 6 Median Pat & Teresa Oneil 801 Spring St Seattle WA 53 98104 1002 W 7th Ave 35193.5513 Apts 12 Median Northview Condos Homeowners Assoc 1007 W 7th Ave Spokane WA 54 99204 1104 W Ave 35193.5606 Apts 12 Low David & Robert Threet 17th Mast Blvd Santee CA 55 1 92071 1212 W 7th Ave Harold 35192.4908 Apts 13 Low John Woodhead 2004 W 56 Pacific Ave # 10 99204 1302 W 7th Ave Russet Hill 35192.5009 Apts 12 Median Russet Hill Apts LLC 12006 57 E 24th 99203 115 S Adams St Adams Street Lofts 35192.5325 Condos/ 6 High Kolva- Sullivan LLC 115 S Apts Adams St Spokane WA 58 99201 MKWJ9 vn MSIM%a@R 151 S Adams St Borning Bldg 35192.1610 Apts; 50 0 14 16 & 10 3- Low Income, Planned Northeast WA Hsg. Undergoing bedrm Rent; conversion - Solutions (NEWHS) Renovation proposed historic TC 50 units 10 home or low inc 59 TC 173 S jAdams St Helen Apts 60 Apts 29 ill 18 10 Low . NA Won Shin 511 S Adams St Faire Lodge 35192.4201 Apts 8 5 3 0 Median NA Scott Manina 3914 W 61 Hoffman Ave 99205 621 S Adams St Mather 35193.4910 Apts 10 Low Talmac LLC 1018 S Glenbrook Ct Spokane 62 Valle 99015 627 S Adams St Mather 35193.4911 Apts 10 Low Talmac LLC 1018 S Glenbrook Ct Spokane 63 Valley 99016 111 N Bernard St Metropolitan Apts 35184.0803 Apts 31 Median Colonial City 7522 N 64 Division St 99208 123 N Bernard St Sherwood Apts 35184.0801 Apts 33 Low Jack & Jennifer Radke 2008 Zephyr Rd Liberty 65 Lake WA 99019 611 S Bernard St 35191.4902 Apts 7 Median K M Haley/ Patrica Mackenzie 6702 E Lowe 66 Rd Mead WA 99021 617 S Bernard St 35194.4908 Apts 6 Median Bette Endresen 31015 67 Temecula CA 92592 627 S Bernard St Vista Court 35194.4909 Apts 16 Low D E and M Schober 3014 68 S Fancher Rd 99223 154 S Browne St Wilton Apts 35191.0701 Apts 55 52 SRO 0 0 Low Yes - Income, Spokane Housing 52 Rent Ventures, Jane Auld, 715 E. Sprague # 102 232 -0200 69 x204 106 S Cedar St Grand Coulee Apts 25241.1201 Apts 49 15 SRO 3 0 Low Yes -3 Historic Wells & Co, 1325 W. 1st 31 Eff exmpt #300, 99201, 624 -8050 expires 70 2006 211 S Cedar St Cedar Apts 35192.2810 Apts 13 1 10 2 Low Yes -2 Richard Cotton PO Box 71 111299210 11 S Cedar St Buena Vista Apts 35192.0101 Apts 41 12 22 .7 Median NA Historic Wells & Co, 1325 W. 1st exmpt #300, 99201, 624 -8050 expired 72 2004 221 N Division St Bel Franklin 35184.0501 Apts 35 Low Bell Franklin LLC 2121 N Waterworks St Spokane 73 WA 99212 r7i7- S Howard St Metropole 35191.2603 Under 10 0 0 Median None Managed by Kiemle & lHagood, 74 1 1 Const. I 838 -6541. 222 S Howard St St. Clair 35191.3105 Apts 33 Low Donald anu Mary O'Connor 7517 NE 124th Ave NE Kirkland WA 75 98033 507 S Howard St Knicker- bocker 35191.4301 Apts 34 9 13 12 Low NA Eugene Allen 507 S 76 Howard St. 99204 606 S Howard St 35191.5305 Apts 8 Low Donald and Susan Lektorich 1515 10th St 77 Coronado CA 92119 623 S Howard St Alexandria 35191.5202 Apts 22 9 13 Low Income, Yes SNAP, 2116 E. 1st Ave, Rent Spokane, 99201, 456 -7111 78 228 N Howard St Couer d'Alene Plaza 35184.1903 Apts 64 11 51 2 Low Yes_ Income, G & B Real Estate Apts 79 Rent 108 S Jefferson Ave Parsons Apts 35192.1305 Apts 50 0 46 4 Low Yes - Income, Yes NE WA Housing 80 50 Rent Solutions, 327 -3037 152 S Jefferson St Jefferson St Auto 35192.5801 Condos 8 0 8 0 Median Multi Auto Lots LLC, (Rencorp) Lofts family 114 W. Pacific #201, 455 - exmpt 3770 expires 2017 81 anticipated 604 S Jefferson St Jefferson Villa 35192.4906 Apts 6 Median Primo Properties LLC 13022 N Sheridan Mead 82 WA 99021 618 S Jefferson St The Jefferson 35193.4907 Apts 12 Median John Woodhead Jr 428 W Riverside Ave #920 83 Spokane WA 99201 612 S Lincoln St Greenview 35195.4608 Apts 34 1 21 10 Median NA 877- 753 -6391 Lincoln Manor LLC 2810 Eastlake Ave E Seattle WA 98102 84 170 S Madison Ave Alberta 35192.1706 Apts/Emgcy 28 20 8 Low Some The City Gate 170 S 85 1 1 1 1 Madison St 99201 504 S Madison Ave City Terrace 35192.4501 Apts 10 Low F.A.T. Family LLC # 1 816 W Francis PMB 204 Ave 86 99205 1101 S Madison Ave Otis Hotel 35192.1204 Apts 160 Low Two by Four Assoc LLC PO Box 22286 Seattle WA 87 198122 239 W Main Ave Saffron Bldg 35184.0908 Apts 4 Median Woodhead Properties LLC 239 W Main Ave Spokane 88 WA 99201 22 W Main Ave The Longbotham 35184.0515 Condos 6 High Daniel Spalding 20 W I Main Ave Spokane WA 89 1 1 1 199201 Wbw _ ' _ usi1K%na9R 809 W Main Ave West 809 35183.2404 Condos 21 2 2 17 High Multi CPC Development 999 W. family Riverside 456 -3413 exmpt expires 2017 90 anticipated 627 S Maple St 91 Apts 5 Median 508 S Monroe St Monrovia 35192.4406 Apts Low D L and J R Nordal 508 S 92 Monroe St 99204 607 S Monroe St Bailey 35192.4601 Apts 4 Median Historic JW Graham Mansion LLC exmpt 607 S Monroe St, Ste 10 expires 99204 93 2015 206 S Post St Carlyle 35192.2306 Assisted 72 138 138 138 Low Yes - Historic Carlyle Care Center, LLC, living Persons Persons Persons 21 exmpt 1115 W. 1st Ave, #220, 94 Served Served Served expires Spokane, 99201 820 N Post St Upper Falls Condos 35182.4245 Condos 34 0 5 7 & 22 3- High Multi Upper Falls LLC, 201 W. bedrm family North River Dr, Spokane, exmpt 951 -9535, expires 2017 95 anticipated 1012 W Railroad Ave Railside Center 35192.5357 Condos 14 0 14 0 Median NA NA Multi Spokane Partners LLC 1016 35192.5356 family (Rencorp), 114 W. Pacific 1020 35192.5355 exmpt #201, 99201, 455 -3770 expires 2017 96 1 anticipated 1221 W Railroad Alley Blue Chip Lofts 35192.5338- Condos 11 10 1 Median Multi Blue Chip Lofts Ave .5348 family Condominiums Owners exmpt Assoc 1221 W Railroad expires Alley Spokane WA 99201 97 2015 224 W Riverside Ave China Best Bldg 35184.0919 Apts 12 1 3 8 Low Multi Gang Li & Loo -Jin Shao, family 3932 S. Bernard St, exmpt Spokane, 455 -9042 expires 2017 98 anticipated 227 W Riverside Ave Havermale Park - 35184.1201 Apts 12 8 4 0 Median Historic Owned & Managed Hale Bldg Tax credit ConoverBond Dev., 9 S. Washington #600, Spokane, 99201, 755 -5555 99 237.5 W Riverside Ave Albert Building 35184.1211 Apts /Corn 4 Median Diamond Parking Inc 3161 Elliott Ave Seattle WA 100 98121 MftwMNvn is, _- Mdc 242 W Riverside Ave Delaney - The 35184A912 Apts 84 7 77 0 Low ` Yes'- Income, Yes Managed & owned by: 84 Rent Catholic Charities, P.O. Box 1453, Spokane, 101 99210, 358 -4264 315 W Riverside Ave Morgan Building 35184.2910- Condos 23 High Historic Wells & Co, 1325 W. 1st Lofts 2932 exmpt #300,99201, 624 -8050 expires 102 2014 MRwMMvn VKAN WR 221 W Riverside Ave West Riverside Apts 35184.1207 Apts/Com 24 24 0 0 Low ' ' NA' ' Kenneth Dotson, P.O. Box 896, Greenacres 99016 103 1224 W Riverside Ave Riverfalls Tower 35183.2234 Apts 99 Median Heylman managed by McVicars & Assoc 458- 104 2726 1227 W Riverside Ave Edwidge 35183.1205 Apts 15 4 11 0 Median NA Wells & Co, 1325 W. 1st #300, 99201, 624 -8050 105 1209- W Riverside Ave Riverside Court 35183.1210- Condos 7 0 0 7 High Wells & Co, 1325 W. 1st 1225 Townhouses 1216 #300, 99201, 624 -8050 106 217 W Spokane Falls Park Tower Apts 35184.0627 Apts. 184 76 108 0 Low Yes = Income, Yes G &B manages 888-723 - Blvd 184 Rent 2110 Expo Tower Assoc 217 W Spokane Falls Blvd Spokane WA 99201 107 236 W Sprague Ave Sydney 35184.1212 Apts 60 60 SRO 0 0 Low Income, Jason Wolfe 4118 a 33rd 108 Rent Ave 99223 406.5 W Sprague Ave Armstrong 109 35184.2802 Apts /Com 20 14 5 1 Low Armstrong Trust PO Box Apartments 21016 Spokane WA 99201509 838 -2751 1120 W Sprague Ave Cathedral Plaza 110 35183.1109 Apts 150 150 0 Low Yes = ` Income, Managed & owned by: 59 Rent Catholic Charities, P.O. Box 1453, Spokane, 99210, 358 -4264 1214 W Sprague Ave Myrtle Apts 111 35183.1208 Apts 18 0 14 4 Median Yes .4 Wells & Co, 1325 W. 1st #300, 99201, 624 -8050 1230 W Sprague Ave San Marco Apts 112 35183.1207 Apts 28 0 28 9 & 3 3- Median NA' Wells & Co, 1325 W. 1st bedrm #300,99201,624 -8050 824 1/2 W Sprague Ave Michael Building 113 35183.0608 Apts 30 15 15 0 Median NA Diamond Parking Inc 3161 Apts Elliott Ave Seattle WA 98121 608 S Stevens St Altadena 114 35191.5204 Apts 38 3 29 6 Median ` None Managed by Kiemle & Hagood, 838 -6541 204 S Wall St Collins - The 115 35192.2204 Apts 39 36 SRO 1 0 Low Income, Yes SNAP, 2116 E. 1st Ave, Rent Spokane, 99201, 456 -7111 225 S Wall St Briggs 116 35191.3108 Apts 45 36 9 0 Low NA Mick McDowell Briggs LTD PTNS PO Box 4094 99202 419 S Washington Ave Campbell 117 35191.3809 Apts 6 0 6 0 Low Yes - Yes Spokane Housing Ventures 1 525 E Mission 99202 �Wdmwn in, ma 425 S Washington Ave Fox Cornelius 118 35191.3810 Apts 17 --0 17 0 Low Yes Spokane housing Ventures, Jane Auld, 715 E. Sprague # 102 232 -0200 x204 930 N Washington Ave Chateaux 119 35181.1108 Apts 88 0 Median Chateaux SPO Co, 1722 S, Carson Ave, Tulsa, OK 74119,888- 658 -7731 213 S Washington Ave Milo Apts 120 Apts. 16 Low SG Mornin, Mgmt " % 341 2124 iS�li1r�sctlsai �tineof'hs � 1103 rt crbser�a�t ,��i �tzte,P�tl�rn`nwa ArA �' �%+;..� 4�4 ,.tQ G 5 �`t�i' '.�"/.✓ � Y�T�.4'3a� f rY Y.Y R� f� � �F p11j�E C ��t�airz i*ad;t�cdon Information Unknown 3324 Totals 10 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE CITY OF SPOKANE AT RISK BUILDINGS and POTENTIAL BUILDINGS AND SITES October 25, 2007 y i age i vi 4 Marty Dickinson From: Shogan, Joe [JShogan @SpokaneCity.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:34 PM To: Helen Stevenson Cc: Marty Dickinson Subject: RE: Bel, Franklin Apartments Helen, the project certainly is among the- City's.highest priorities of developingAncreasing the available stock of low income housing. Joe . Shogan From: Helen.Ste.venson.[mailto; hstevenson @spokanehousingyentures.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 28,,2007 9:27 AM To: Shogan, Joe Subject: RE: Bel Franklin Apartments We will close on the acquisition in May,'2008, all'funding will be committed by February or March and we can actually close earlier if everything goes smoothly -we leave ourselves two months for'glitches'. REhab will begin immediately and cert of occupancy will be received no later than Nov, 2008. Full occupancy is expected - before end of 2008. The units consist of 6 studio and 30 one bedroom. Rents will range from: 30% studio units (net rent to tenant) - $274 (all 6) 30% 1 BDRM (net rent to tenant) - $290 (12 units) 40% 1 BDRM (net rent to tenant) - $398 (9 units) 60% 1 BDRM (net rent to tenant) - $510 (8 units) One management unit with value of $510 The market study completed for these units shows maximum market rents as follows: Studio - $350 One Bedroom - (smaller unit) - $460 One Bedroom - (larger unit) - $510 This project will have rents below market for 27 units with market rents in 8 units to support ongoing maintenance of the project. Our funders require mixed incomes and we believe that the quoted rents are achievable. With a protective payee in place or with some history of being able to maintain rents at $398, we would rent to an individual on an income of $650 per month, which is well below the 30 and 40% income ranges quoted above. Helen Stevenson, Manager Acquisitions & Development Spokane Housing Ventures 715 E Sprague Avenue, Suite 102 Spokane, WA 99202 Phone: 509.232.0170 ext. 208 Fax: 509.484.4617 From: Shogan, Joe (mailto:JShogan @SpokaneCity.org] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 8:10 PM To: Helen Stevenson Subject: RE: Bel Franklin Apartments 8/29/2007 Page 2 of 2 Helen, I need to know how many units will result from the rehab, the projected completion date, and the range of rents anticipated. Thank you, Joe Shogan From: Helen Stevenson [ mailto: hstevenson @spokanehousingventures.org] Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 7:10 PM To: Shogan, Joe; Verner, Mary; Stark, Brad Subject: Bel Franklin Apartments Spokane Housing Ventures is in the process of submitting an application to the State of Washington, CTED, Housing Trust Fund for funds to complete the acquisition and rehab of the Bel ,Franklin apartments, which will become a critical piece of Housing for the most vulnerable'populations`in our community. We currently have an application for funding pending with the City's CD department but would like to ask the three of you to support this project as a vital project to maintain affordable units in the downtown core. We fully intend to completely rehabilitate the units, providing green space on the rooftop, new elevator, floor coverings that are sustainable and paints that are low VOC content. The returning tenants (6) and some displaced tenants from our 5th & Washington project, Madison and possibly Otis hotel will have first'priority for these units. We would appreciate your support for this project in the form of a letter ore -mail so that we may include them our application. The state specifically asks the question, "Describe how this project fits into your community's housing priorities. " I can and will certainly speak to how the project ,fits into the consolidated plan and can address the specifics, but. under the current circumstances, it seems most appropriate to include the City's support for the Bel Franklin "units. Thanks for your assistance. Helen Stevenson, Manager Acquisitions & Development Spokane Housing Ventures 715 E Sprague Avenue, Suite 102 Spokane, WA 99202 Phone: 509.232.0170 ext. 208 Fax: 509.484.4617 8/29/2007 Parcel Legal Description. Minimum No. Bid 1 14302.0803 Clearview 1st Lot 82, Block 37, located within NW (1/4) $800 of 30-24-41 E.W.M. 2 25131.1514 13 25 42 CHAMBERLINS ADD N40' OF LT 7 BLK 15 $13,000 Located in NE(1/4) of 13-25-42 E.W.M 3 25242.1905 Cannon's Addition, portion of Lot 8 Block 27; beginning at a point on the North line 84.72 ft east of the NW corner; thence west to the NW corner; thence south along the west line for 36.82.feet; thence Northeasterly to the point of beginning. Located in NW(1/4) of 24-25- 42 E.W.M. 5 32041.0104 Spangle Resurvey & Addition also know as Plat of $10,000 Resurvey and Addition to The Town of Spangle Lots 4- 5 Block 1 6 35033.1410 The west I ft of Lot 9 Block 14 of Minnehaha Addition $100 recorded in Volume A, page 94 of Plats. Located in SW 1/4 of 3-25:43 E.W.M. 8 35124.0512 Assessors Plat 1, portion of Block 4, Beginning 20 feet $170 west of the northeast comer thence South 23 feet thence northwesterly to a point 23 feet west of Point of Beginning, thence east to Point of Beginning. Located within SE 1/4 of 12-25-43 12 35204.0611 Highland Park Hartsons South 40 feet of West 1/2 of Lot $16,100 2, Block 5. Located within SE 1/4 of 20-25-43 13 35222.4410 Bisbee's Third Addition, West 6 ft. of Lot 7, Block 1. $150 Located within NW 1/4 of 22-25-43 14 35222.4435 22 25 43 BISBEE'S 3RD ADD W6FT OF LT 6 BLK 1 $300 15 35241.3515 24 25 43 EMPIRE HTS 2ND E3FT OF L35 B3 $400 16 35302.1303 30 25 43 ASSESSORS 8 WALL&ROBB E2FT L3 B2 $240 17 36281.0527 28 26 43 MORGAN AC PK EIFT L21 B17 $100 19 36334.1320 ARLINGTON HTS 2ND H&C LTS 35 THRU 38 Block 29 $180 EXC S128FF 21 36344.1425 The north 7.5 feet of the East half of the south half of $1,100 Lot 5, Block 9 Endion Addition. Located in SE(1/4) of 34-26-43 22 36344.1426 The north 7.5 feet of the West 1/2 of the S 1/2 of lot 5, $1,100 Block 9 of Endion Addition. Located in SE(1/4) of 34- 26 -43 23 39351.0312 Milan McWilliams 1STAddition; Portion of Tract C $10,000 described as follows; Beginning 50 feet Northerly from the southwest corner of Tract C, thence northerly 100 feet, thence East 150 feet, thence south to a point 50 feet north of the South line of the Tract; thence westerly to Point of Beginning., except Milan Road NO.232. 24 41034.1702 03-21-44 WAVERLY MORRISONS LIO B20 TOG W/ $2,000 W1/2 OF VAC ALLEY LYG E OF & AD] 25 41034.1704 1 Waverly Morrisons abandoned r/w across Lot 17, Block $2,000 20. , Parcel Legal Description Minimum No. Bid. - 26 45074.9084 15 foot strip south of & adjacent to NPRR RW across NE. $2,200 1/4 of NW 1/4 of NW 1/4 of SE 1/4 Section 7, Township 25 North Range 44East ' W.M.. 28 53215.9013 2123 45 PTN OF NW1 /4 & SW 1 /4;BEG AT -NECOR OF $5,800 SW 1/4 TH N1 ROD TH W 1 ROD TH S TO _CO RD, TH NELY TO ITS INT WITH E LN OF SW1. /4 TH N TO POB. 29 55031`.9013 03 25.45 N3FT OF E1 /2 OF,SW1 /4 OF LT.2 OF NE1 /4 $70 30 57084.9006 West 1 ft of the. Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 . $100 lying southerly of Wallis Road within Section 8, I,Township 27 Ran e.45 E.W.M. , r Cour►�' �a�,�Qs Qv�iia,�r�� Parcel Legal Deser .010n Minimum To. B1. 1 14302.0803 Clearview 1st Lot 82, Block 37, located within NW $800 1/4 of 30 -24 -41 E.W.M. 2 25131.1514 13 25 42 CHAMBERLINS ADD N40' OF LT 7 BLK 15 $13,000 Located in NE 1/4 .- of'.13 -25 -42 E.W.M. 3 25242.1905 Cannon's Addition, portion of Lot 8 Block 27; beginning $7,800 at a point on the North line 84.72 ft east of the NW, corner; thence west to the NW corner; thence south along the west line for 36.82 feet; thence Northeasterly to the point of beginning. Located in ' NW 1/4 of 24 -25 -42 E.W.M. 5 32041.0104 Spangle Resurvey & Addition also know as Plat of $10,000 Resurvey and Addition to The Town of Spangle Lots 4- 5, Block 1 6 35033.1410 The west 1 ft of Lot 9 Block 14 of Minnehaha Addition $100 recorded in Volume A, page 94 of Plats. Located in SW 1/4 of 3 -25 -43 E.W.M. ` 8 35124.0512 Assessors Plat 1, portion of Block 4, Beginning 20 feet $170. west of the northeast corner thence South 23 feet thence northwesterly to a point 23 feet west of Point of Beginning, thence east to Point of Beginning. Located within SE 1/4 of 12 -25 -43 12 35204.0611 Highland Park Hartsons South 40 feet of West 1/z of Lot $16,100 2 Block 5. Located within SE 1/4 of 20 -25 -43 ;13 35222.4410 Bisbee's Third Addition, West 6 ft. of Lot 7, Block 1. $150 Located within NW 1/4 of 22 -25 -43 14 35222.4435 22 25 43 BISBEE'S 3RD ADD W6FT OF LT 6 BLK 1 $300 15 35241.3515 24 25 43 EMPIRE HTS 2ND E3FT OF L35 B3 $400 16 35302.1303 30 25 43 ASSESSORS 8 WALL &ROBB E2FT L3 B2 $240 17 36281.0527 28 26 43 MORGAN AC PK E1FT L21 B17 $100 19 36334.1320 ARLINGTON HTS 2ND H &C LTS 35 THRU 38 Block 29 $180 EXC S128FT 21 36344.1425 The north 7.5 feet of the East half of the south half of $1,100 Lot 5, Block 9 Endion Addition. Located in SE(1 /4) of 34 -26 -43 22 .36344.1426 The north 7.5 feet of the West 1/2 of the S 1/2 of lot $1,100 5, Block 9 of Endion Addition. Located in SE(1 /4) of 34 -26 -43 23 39351.0312 Milan McWilliams 1STAddition; Portion of Tract C $10,000 described as follows; Beginning 50 feet Northerly from the southwest corner of Tract C, thence northerly 100 feet, thence East 150 feet, thence south to a point 50 feet. north of the South line of the Tract; thence westerly to Point of Beginning., except Milan Road NO.232. 24 41034.1702 03 -21 -44 WAVERLY MORRISONS L10 B20 TOG W/ $2,000 W1/2 OF VAC ALLEY LYG E OF & ADJ x ;25 41034.1704 Waverly Morrisons abandoned r/w across Lot 17, Block $2,000 ' 20. (' .. r AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKRCE HOUSING LEVY INFORMATION October 25, 2007 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE DEVELOPING AFFORDABLE HOUSING October 25,, 2007 Excerpted from Budget Suggestions for 2004, MRSC Information Bulletin No. 416, August 2003 Public Development Authorities by Jay Reich, Stacey Crawshaw -Lewis and Deanna Gregory, Preston Gates and Ellis LLP Public development authorities, or PDAs, can be established by cities or counties pursuant to RCW 35.21.730 et seq. to perform public functions that the creating city or county could perform itself. PDAs are instrumentalities of their creating jurisdiction. PDAs are often created to manage the development and operation of a single project, which the city or county determines is best managed outside of its traditional bureaucracy and.lines of authority. The particular project may be entrepreneurial in nature and intersect with the private sector in ways that would strain public resources and personnel. For example, the Pike Place Market is 'a City of Seattle PDA and essentially acts as the landlord to scores of retail establishments and nonprofit services provided in a series of historic buildings: The City of Seattle has determined that day -to -day operations of such an enterprise is best managed by professionals independent of the City, given the untraditional nature of the enterprise and the importance of responding-to the unique needs of the private retail marketplace. The following questions and answers discuss PDA powers, formation, governance, potential uses, advantages, disadvantages and applicable legal requirements. A. What Are Public Development Authorities? PDAs are public corporations created by a city or county to perform a particular public purpose or public function specified in the ordinance or resolution creating the PDA and its charter. RCW 35.21.730. Although PDAs may be created for a general purpose, PDAs are more often created for a specific project or undertaking reflected in the PDA's charter. B. Why Are Public Development Authorities Formed? PDAs are created to (1) administer and execute federal grants or programs; (2) receive and administer private funds, goods or services for any lawful purpose; and (3) to perform any lawful public purpose or public function. RCW 35.21.730(5). Such undertakings may be specified in the PDA's charter. PDAs are frequently created to undertake a specific project or activity requiring focused attention. PDAs tend to be more entrepreneurial than their sponsoring municipality, involving private sector participants as board members or partners. PDAs allow municipalities to participate in projects that they may be otherwise disinclined to partake in due to project risks and competing priorities of the municipality. While PDAs have broad statutory authority to perform any lawful public purpose or public function, PDAs cannot undertake a public function that the creating city or county could not lawfully perform. See Memorandum Opinion of the Attorney General of Washington to Robert V. Graham, State Auditor, March 10, 1989. A PDA is thus limited to perform only public purposes or public functions that the creating municipality may undertake directly. A PDA may be limited further by specific reference to a particular undertaking in the PDA's charter. C. What Powers Do Public. Development Authorities Have? The powers of a PDA are provided in chapter 35.21 RCW. PDAs may: Own and sell real and personal property; Contract with a city, town or county to conduct community renewal activities; A PDA is also subject to constitutional constraints imposed on local governments, primarily limiting the use of public funds. As described above, Article Vlll, Sections 5 and 7 of the Washington Constitution prohibit the lending of public credit or .gift of public funds to .private, entities, with limited except -ions. Furthermore, Article VII, Section i and Article Vill, Section 6, require that public debt be incurred and taxes levied exclusively for public purposes. Such constitutional constraints. are often triggered when a PDA is formed to encourage private sector. investment. Editor's Note: We want to emphasize how important it is that everyone who is.or will be involved with a PDA read and understand the above section on legal requirements. City and county staff know that it is sometimes hard to educate newly elected officials in these matters. Some ' of the restrictions under which local governments operate seem so, well, "restrictive!" .Businessmen often tell us that they would not be able to make a profit if they had to run their businesses under these same laws. One PDA board commissioner has been quoted as saying, "My God, we're so constrained by so man)' rules, what's the point of it all? You can't turn around without stepping into a legal minefield ". This May , be particularly true when a city or county wants to form a PDA to promote economic development. Economic development practitioners often cannot believe that cities and counties (and, therefore, PDAs) cannot do promotional hosting with public funds. (They work with port districts and those districts CAN use public funds for promotional hosting.) Serving coffee or soft drinks at a meeting is about the most that can be done by cities, counties, and PDAs. What PDAs can and cannot do with a private partner can be complicated legally. To traverse the "legal minefield" safely, PDAs should work with attorneys experienced in municipal law and with PDAs in particular. Contract with individuals, associations, corporations, the State of Washington and the United States; `c Sue and be sued; Loan and borrow funds and issue bonds and other instruments evidencing indebtedness; Transfer funds, real or personal property, property interests or services: Engage in. anything a natural person may do; and Perform all types of community services. D. How Are Public Development Authorities Formed? A city or county may form a PDA by passing an ordinance or resolution approving the PDA's charter. The charter will include the PDA's' name, scope of the projector purpose, the term of the PDA, and board characteristics. The charter may provide for municipal oversight and will limit the liability of the creating municipality. Because PDAs are separate legal entities, all liabilities incurred by the PDA must be satisfied exclusively from the assets of the PDA, except as otherwise agreed by contract. PDA creditors do not have any right of action against or recourse to the creating municipality, or its assets, on account of the PDA's debts, obligations, liabilities or acts or omissions. E. How Are Public Development Authorities Governed? The PDA's charter establishes the PDA's governing body composition, size, and nomination process. RCW 35.21.730 et seq. does not require any particular board composition and, therefore, the creating city or county has significant latitude in crafting a governance structure suited to the- PDA's purpose. For kJ example, PDA boards are often composed of persons with particular technical expertise (financing, construction or legal) and persons,who represent key stakeholders. The PDA's charter also usually determines the term of the PDA. The charter may include a sunset provision, which may automatically dissolve the PDA upon completion of the project or its financing. Alternatively, if the PDA has a broader mandate encompassing numerous phases of an ongoing project or a general endeavor, the PDA's existence may be indefinite. PDA staffing, administrative costs, and oversight requirements may vary as the particular undertakings differ. The creating municipality will have limited control over the PDA, but will not be relieved of all oversight responsibility. By statute, the city or county is required to oversee and control the PDA's operations and funds in order to correct any deficiency and to assure that the purposes of each project are reasonably accomplished. See RCW 35.21.745. The PDA's accounting and other responsibilities to its creating city or county may be identified in the PDA's charter and serve to assist the city or county in meeting its oversight obligations. The municipality may further.specify the level of autonomy, accountability, and control it will have over the PDA in the PDA's charter or in any contracts or leases the municipality executes with the PDA. F. What Type of Projects Can Public Development Authorities Construct, Operate and Finance? A PDA may undertake any "public purpose" specified in the PDA's charter and that is a lawful public purpose or undertaking of the creating municipality. Examples of projects include developing the Seattle Art Museum, assisting in the development of the Museum of Flight at Boeing Field in King County, developing City Hall on Mercer Island, restoring Officers' Row in Vancouver, managing the Pike Place Market in Seattle, and developing the Convention Center in Bellevue. G. What Resources Do Public Development Authorities Have? PDAs do not have the power of eminent domain or the authority to levy taxes. RCW 35.21.745. A PDA may borrow funds or issue tax - exempt bonds. Despite broad authority to -undertake various projects, PDA financing is generally project specific. To facilitate access to the financial markets, PDA project financings are often backed by a city or county guarantee, typically in the form of a contingent loan agreement. A creating city or county may adopt an ordinance authorizing the transfer of property or funds to a PDA. RCW 35.21.730. Property and funds frequently transferred to a PDA include real property and operating funds. A creating municipality can control and oversee how the PDA uses the transferred property by placing terms and conditions on a PDA's use of such property in the transferring documentation. A transfer of property or funds to the PDA from the creating city or county does not violate the constitutional prohibition on the lending of credit or giving of public funds by a city, county.or other municipal corporation. Article Vill, Sections 5 and 7 of the Washington Constitution prohibit the lending of public credit or gift of public funds to private entities. This prohibition does not apply to transfers between municipal agencies and is therefore not violated when a parent city or county transfers funds to its PDA. See State, ex rel. Wash. Toll Bridge Auth. v. Yelle, 56 Wn2d 86, 104, 351 P.2d 493 (1960); Mount Spokane v. Spokane County, 86 Wash. App. 165, 936 P.2d 1.148 (1997), review denied, 133 Wn.2d 102. 1 (1997). H. Can Public Development Authorities Issue Tax - Exempt Bonds? PDAs can issue tax - exempt bonds pursuant to RCW 35.21.735. As noted above, PDAs do not have taxing authority, and so can pledge only project, grant or other revenues to repay bonds. In order to access financial markets at attractive rates, PDA project revenue bonds are often backed by a city or county guarantee or contingent loan agreement. If the agreement is contingent in nature, it should not be a debt of the city or county for the purposes of constitutional and statutory debt limitations, but will need to be identified on the city or county financial statements. There are numerous federal tax law considerations that a PDA must take into account: when financing a project with tax - exempt debt. For the bonds to be tax - exempt, the project must be used for a public purpose, as opposed to a private activity, and must be repaid from public funds and not private sources. Any private management contract must meet the safe harbor provisions under the .federal tax code. All of these issues would need to be reviewed by bond counsel. 1. What Are Examples of Recent Public Development Authority Projects? Recent projects completed by PDAs include the Village Square project completed in two phases by the Seattle Chinatown- International District Preservation and Development Authority ( ".SCIDPDA "), a PDA created by The City of Seattle. The project includes affordable family housing, a Seattle Parks Department recreation center and .Seattle Public .Library branch, as well. as senior .housing, retail space and space for health and social service non - profit agencies. The Foss Waterway Development Authority, a PDA created by the City of Tacoma, facilitates redevelopment of previously contaminated areas of Tacoma's Foss Waterway, entering into agreements with private developers interested in developing parcels in a manner consistent with the City's plan for the Waterway. The Seattle Art Museum is a tenant in the museum owned by the Museum Development Authority, a PDA formed by The City of Seattle. The PDA Board is composed in part of members nominated by the Seattle Art Museum. The PDA is undertaking an expansion of its space. Washington Mutual, the Seattle Art Museum and the PDA are planning for joint development of a 40 -story downtown tower that would provide new corporate headquarters for the bank and allow the museum ultimately to triple in size. J. What Are the Disadvantages and Advantages of Forming a Public Development Authority? J - A potential disadvantage of forming a PDA is the relatively low level of control the creating city or county has over the PDA or the project. Although the creating municipality has oversight responsibilities �` " • for PDA operations to assure the purposes of the PDA are fulfilled, generally the creation, management, and facilitation of the project is in the hands of the PDA's governing board. Despite contract or charter provisions providing for oversight and control over the PDA, the PDA remains autonomous. The lack of control over the project and the PDA, however, may be beneficial for the city or county for it reduces liability and financial risk for the city or county. A PDA also provides a vehicle for a city or county.to support a project without diverting city or county staff to the undertaking and to attract private citizens to serve on the PDA board. K. What Legal Requirements Apply to Public Development Authorities? Generally, a PDA is subject to all "general laws regulating local governments, multimember governing bodies, and local government officials." RCW 35.21.759. Such legal requirements include, but are not limited to, compliance with the following laws: To be audited by the State auditor and to be subject to various accounting requirements provided by chapter 43.09 RCW; Open public record requirements under chapter 42.17 RCW; Open public meetings and other public process laws as provided in chapter 42.30 RCW; Public works requirements under chapter 39.04 RCW; Competitive bidding and prevailing wage laws provided in chapter 39.04 RCW; Local government whistleblower laws as provided in chapter 42.41 RCW; The prohibition on using PDA facilities for campaign purposes under RCW 42.17.130; and The Code of Ethics for municipal officers under chapter 42.23 RCW. `9 D OWNTOWN S P O K A N E MEMORANDUM DOWNTOWN SPOKANE PARTNERSHIP NT0'l N -0 ;'d EUS 7 v:G.7S I'vi PROWF .. DISTR,C TO: Susan Ashe, Director of Legislative & Public.Affairs City of Spokane FROM: Marty Dickinson, President Jeff Nave, Chair John Bennett, Public Policy Committee Chair Downtown Spokane Partnership RE: State Housing Committee Meeting August 3, 2007 — Seattle DATE: July 25, 2007 .DOWNTOWN SPOKANE VENTURES You requested the Downtown Spokane Partnership ( 'DSP') to provide input on whether "condominium conversions" (i.e. conversions of apartment buildings into residential condominiums) are having a material adverse affect on the availability of affordable rental housing units in Spokane's downtown core and adjacent neighborhoods: We understand that the Association of Washington Cities has solicited the City of Spokane's testimony on this issue. The DSP has obtained a survey uindertaken by the appraisal firm of Auble, Jolicoeur & Gentry of all condominium in Spokane County that have been converted from apartment buildings over the years. The survey reflects that 667 apartment units have been converted to condominium units on a county -wide basis. Of those units, 233 are located on the Lower South Hill, 227 are located in North Spokane, 164 are located in Brown's Addition, and 43 are located outside the City limits. Tlne survey also estimates that 273 apartment units will be converted to condominium units during 2007, 224 of which are located in Big Trout Lodge (gun upscale apartment community in Liberty Lake), 24 of which are located on the Lower South Hill, 14 of which are located on the Upper South Hill, and 11 of which are located in Brown's Addition. The DSP is not aware of atnv apartment buildings in the City's downtown core that are being converted to condominiums. J%l�any of the recent condominium projects in downtown Spokane have involved the rehabilitation of vacant (or under - utilized) warehouses and other commercial buildings. The recent tenant displacements at The Otis, The New 1\ ladisoln, and The Commercial Building result from the renovation of properties to provide mixed- income rental housing or, in the case of The Commercial, to provide for new commercial uses. We are aware the City of Seattle and other Puget Sound area communities have suffered a loss of affordable rental housing units in their downtown cores as a result of condominium conversions in the last few years. We suspect these conversions may result, in part, from market factors—e.g. longer commutes, greater average per capita personal wealth, and the scarcity of undeveloped land within urban P 509.456.0580 € 509.747.3127 211 N. WALL ST. STE. 300 SPOKANE WASHINGTON 99201 downtown.spokane.nef Page 2 . Jufy 31; 2007 growth boundaries —that are not experienced in Spokane at the current time. We also suspect that many of the condominium conversions in the Spokane area were the result of a relatively soft rental housing market during the period that home loans were relatively easy to obtain. The DSP co-sponsored the Downtown Spokane Housing Study with the City and Fannie Mae. The DSP favors a downtown neighborhood in which rental and home ownership opportunities are available to persons of all income levels. Until such time as proposed legislation (if any) is drafted, the DSP is not in a position to provide comments on whether legislation in this area is warranted. However, as the City works with AWC and other cities to evaluate the desirability of such legislatiori,'we suggest that the City seriously consider whether the stated goals of any such legislation (e.g. the promotion of affordable rental housing for persons of low income) are narrowly tailored to address problems that actually are being encountered in Spokane (or are reasonably anticipated to occur in Spokane'in the foreseeable future). In this regard, it may be appropriate (if the facts so warrant) to treat hilly -developed downtowns like Seattle and Bellevue differently the developing downtowns such as Spokane's. The DSP also applauds the City's efforts in convening the Mayor's Affordable Housing Taskforce. We assume the Taskfoxe will have some opportunity to review Spokane's needs and recommend appropriate policy based upon facts surrounding Spokane's housing concerns. c: Mayor Dennis Hermon John Pilcher Developing Affordable Housing February 22, 2007 Affordable Housing Definition • Under the guideline used by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, housing is considered affordable if monthly housing costs are no greater than 30% of a household's monthly income. Recent Housing Trends Spokane Median Home Price 2002 $111,500 2003 $ 2004 $129,000 2005 $152,000 2006 $175,000 Median Home Prices have increased over $60,000 since 2002 Recent Housing, Trends Spokane Median New Home Price 2002 $160,000 2003 $177,252 2004 $189,200. 2005 $215,641 2006 $229,000 Median New Product is $50,000+ higher than existing inventory. Affordability Spokane's Workforce Housing Range Area Median Income Annual Income Max Rent/Mortgage Payment Max Mortgage Low Income 60% $31,770 $786 $109,154 Workforce 80% $42,360 $1,047 $145,539 100% $52,950 $1,309 $181,924 120% $63,540 $1,571 $218,309 Market 140% $74,130 $1,833 $254,694 160% $84,720 $2,095 $291,078 180% $95,310 $2,357 $327,463 200% $105,900 $2,618 $363,848 220% $116,490 $2,880 $400,233 240% $127,080 $3,142 $436,618 Luxury 260% $137,670 $3,404 $473,002 280% $148,260 $3,666 $509,387 300% $158,850 $3,928 $545,772 Washington State Changing Demographics A g e Total 0 -4 5 -9 1 0 -1 4 1 5 -1 9 2 0 -2 4 0 -2 4 % C h a n g e 2 5 -2 9 3 0 -3 4 3 5 -3 9 4 0 -4 4 4 5 -4 9 25 -49 % C h a n g e 5 0 -5 4 5 5 -5 9 6 0 -6 4 6 5 -6 9 5 0 -6 9 % C h a n g e 2005 6 ,2 5 6 ,4 0 0 1 0 0 % 4 0 6 ,3 2 4 4 1 1 ,5 6 4 4 4 1 ,7 4 6 4 5 0 ,2 2 8 448,636 2 ,1 5 8 ,4 9 8 1 0 0 % 411,912 422,367 4 4 9 ,9 8 5 4 9 0 ,8 2 6 494,025 2 ,2 6 9 ,1 1 5 1 0 0 % 453,428 3 8 6 ,5 6 8 2 7 6 ,9 8 1 1 9 9 ,9 6 9 1 ,3 1 6 ,9 4 6 1 0 0 % 2 0 1 0 6 ,8 1 1 ,2 1 6 453,877 4 4 0 ,7 4 8 4 4 0 ,7 5 3 4 7 1 ,5 9 4 4 9 2 ,5 5 1 2 ,2 9 9 ,5 2 3 1 0 7 % 4 9 7 ,8 1 5 4 5 0 ,5 5 4 447,485 4 6 5 ,2 6 0 5 0 0 ,9 5 1 2 ,3 6 2 ,0 6 5 1 0 4 % 4 9 9 ,5 6 8 4 5 2 ,8 4 6 3 7 9 ,7 8 0 2 6 6 ,2 9 3 1,598,487 1 2 1 % 2015 7 ,2 7 8 ,5 1 1 4 8 7 ,2 2 4 478,720 4 6 1 ,0 2 3 4 5 9', 9 2 4 4 9 9 ,9 4 7 2 ,3 8',6 ,8 3.8 1 1 1 % 526,937 5 2 7 ,3 6 4 467,476 4 5 6 ,2'9 1 4 7 0 ,0 4 3 2,448,111 1 0 8 % 5 0 2 ,0 6 7 4 9 4 ,9'7 0 4 4 1, 5 7 7 362,409 1 ,8 0 1 ,0 2 3 1 3 7 % 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 5 7 ,7 2 5 ,3 8 0 8 ,0 9 4 ,4 3 9 5 0 8 ,2 3 8 510,667 498,127 478,724 484,3.45 2 ,4 8 0 ,1 0 1 115% 530,613 5 5 4 ,2 2 0 5 4 4 ,3 4 7 475,388 4 5 9 ,9 72 2,'564,540 1 1 3 % 470,417 49 6 ,8 8 4 4 8 2 ,3 4 5 4 2 1 ,3 8 1 1 ,8 7 1 ,0 2 7 1 4 2 % 7 0 -7 4 1 6 0 ,0 6 0 1 8 3 ,9 7 9 2 4 4 ,0 8 2 3 3 2 ,8 3 5 7 5 -7 9 1 3 7, 1 1 1 1 3 7 ,5 0 3 1 5 8 ,2 4 6 2 1 1 ,0 1 4 8 0 -8 4 1 1 0 ,2 4 8 1 0 6 ,6 5 7 1 0 7 ,4 2 0 1 2 4 ,7 7 8 8 5+ 1 0 4 ,4 2 2 1 2 3 ,0 0 2 1 3 2 ,7 9 1 1 4 1 ,0 8 5 7 0 -8 5+ 5 1 1 ,8 4 1 5 5 1 ,1 4 1 6 4'2 ,5 3.9 8 0 9 ,7 1 2 % C h a n g e 1 0 0% 1 0 8% 1 2 6% - 1 5 8% Washington State - Office of Financial Management - 2005 Forcast 519,116 5 3 1 ,7 2 9 530,560 516,498 503,134 2,601,037 1 2 1 % 512,893 5 5 6 ,9 0 8 5 7 1 ,3 4 2 553;139 479,140 2 ,6 7 3 ,4 2 2 1 1 8 % 4 6 0 ,2 1 4 4 6 5 ,7 7 5 4 8 4 ,5 4 5 460,867 1 ,8 7 1 ,4 0 1 2 0 3 0 8 ,5 9 4 ,7 1 4 1 3 7.% 5 2 9 ,5 6 6 542,252 5 5 1 ,7 1 1 549,442 5 4 1 ,8 7 8 2 ,7 1 4 ,8 4 9 1 2 6 % 531,737 537,473 5 7 3 ,3 8 2 5 8 0 ,2 3 2 5 5 7 ,3 0 0 2,780,124 1 2 3 % 479,443 455,644 454,579 463,438 1,853,104 1 4 2% 1 4 1% 3 8 7 ,9 8 0 4 2 5 ,0 8 8 2 8 9 ,2 8 0 3 8 8 ,4 0 5 1 67,939 211„-,292 103,380 #* "L01,352-` 9 4.8 ,5 7 9 1 1 ,2 4 6 ,6 3 7 1 8 5% 2 4 4% Changing Demographics Need for Different and Smaller Housing. Product Affordability Index Los San San Las Angeles Francisco Diego Vegas Seattle Phoenix Portland Denver Spokane Median home value: $525,000 $835,000 $591,000 $319,000 $360,000 $259,000 $265,000 $262,000 $175,000 Median family income: $54,450 $88,450 $62,900 $59,050 $72,950 $58,300 $65,900 $71,700 $52,950 Median home value to median family income: 9.6 9.4 9.4 5.4 4.9 4.4 4 3.7 3.3 Housing Affordability Rating Home Price / Income Severely unaffordable 5.1 and more Seriously unaffordable 4.1 to 5.0 Moderately unaffordable 3.1 to 4.0 Affordable 3.0 or less Sources: Money Magazine Real Estate 2006 Median Home Income — US Dept. of Housing and Development 2005 Median Home Prices — Fisery Lending Solutions; National Association of Realtors 2005 Vii'. •C �kS •T,'i9 h ....... ":'3�Y1i�-0h, s�, ".;.,a - S' a�iF'. ..' '^ ','ki,1,'k - 5% $220 Understanding Household Purchasing Patterns g3' clothing 4% $176 T,. Average Annual Household Expenditures Medium Income Wonthly a Item Proportion of Total Expenditure Expenditur s s $52, 950 YR shelter (home mortgage or rent) 32% $1,412 $88 spa car ownership & operating expenses n 17% $750 u. �; food 13% $574 pensions & Social Security contributions 10% $441 utilities 7% $308 s4 f- health care 6% $265 entertainment 5% $220 g3' clothing 4% $176 T,. household furnishing 4% $176 mr education $88 �; fr34ti Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Land Use ar WORK TRIPS MODE DISTRIB By Location of Household and BICYCLE 3.0% WALK ':'.... 25.5% BUS (PUBLIC TRANSIT) 25.2% HOV 2 1.7% HOV 1 6.2% OTHER 0.0% SOV' 38.3% Urban Household INSIDE Centers Work INSIDE Centers (4.6% of work trips) d Transportation ITION pork FPtBce BICYCLE WALK 1.4% % 1.8% (PUBLIC TRANSIT) 2.0% HOV 2 2.2% OTHER 0.6% Single I! Occupancy HOV 1 SOV Vehicles 7'1 °�° - o 84.9 /o Suburban Household OUTSIDE Centers Work OUTSIDE Centers (59.9% of work trips) • WALKING rate = 25.5% INSIDE/INSIDE VS. 1.8 % OUTSIDE /OUTSIDE • HOV. rate = 33.2% INSIDE /INSIDE Vs. 11.3 % - OUTSIDE /OUTSIDE • BUS ,(Public Transit) rate = 25.2 %o INSIDE/INSIDE Vs. 2.0% OUTSIDE /OUTSIDE Source: Ruth L. Steiner- Multimodal Concurrency New Urbanism Smart Growth Str g a teies Accommodating growth in a way to maximize it's benefits and reduce as much as possible the negative effects. • Flexibility in land use density • Mixed use zoning • Diversity in housing types • Mixed-use housing • Effective and timely development processing • Reasonable road standards • Managing sprawl • Encouraging alternate transportation • Minimize private vehicular traffic • Encourage walkable communities We must establish communities that are economically integrated. Affordable for the residents to LIVE and WORK and PLAY, = ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN Stapleton Districts I & 11 M, 'M' PRELIMINARY CONCEPT PLAN Overall Land Use PLAN M.« m I- �5 Y f t ll #, . f,. go x t Ffi y t y� S y�q�k@� y✓X �5 Y f t ll #, . f,. go x t Ffi y t y� S 0:", 1 vlzfil OF Oal KEY 0:", 1 vlzfil OF Oal Connectivity • Value of an enhanced "Public Domain" - Walkable communities - Safe - Mixed -use, scaled environment • A stronger commitment from local governments to value our right of way corridors not for their capacity to move vehicles, but, for their ability to encourage positive pedestrian interaction and mobility. Our "Right of Way" corridors must be better designed for a broad range of travel choices. Creative Development Standards - Increased Density • Flexible lot sizes - Increase opportunities for Multi - Family Housing • In Many Major Markets, MF is 50% of New Housing Stock - Cluster Housing • Reducing lot. sizes with common open space areas - Accessory Dwelling Units • Offer affordable opportunities for renters, and also subsidize existing owners. - Flexible Parking Standards • Emphasis on pedestrian oriented transit. • ITITM st • 0 0 iiii Mvew I A to .......... OR voug gqgr ME p"T prig Alley Homes v] 1 Mm [ • IVIT/ 0 ■ 0 [• r zt f ui L" 1' ti f5.:. g "Irli- All "a 6 E� x §%7 i,�'jY1� @��eY��`j5�� j: �`�1i4��k3ltflef•4( •f} ,{ ea _ % g,� s ✓iz i c r� gau T v ,.�p a y� '� ,d�}4eSx"Lir Y A .arse Ji lop t air a Fsl Boise, Idaho - Increased Density A- ACcessory Builclinr rte'" ��`q E��a �� d,.. �a� Y � � � ��/ Low Income Housing Unintended Consequence • Effective. development that meets the goals of our planning policies often leads to increased property values thus lessening the availability of low income housing. • The current revitalization of our downtown has the potential of displacing our most needy citizens, decreasing their accessibility to vital services. Meeting Needs of our Low Income Citizens • As an industry, our greatest challenge will be to meet the needs of our low income citizens. • Low to moderate household Income is defined as 50% to 80% of the median Income. HUD Income Eligibility Area Median Income 2006 Household Size Very Low Income 50% of AMI 1 $22,950 2 $26,200 3 $29,500 4 $32,750 5 $35,350 6 $38,000 7 $40,600 8 $43,250 Lower Income Median Income Moderate Income 80% of AMI 100% of AMI 120% of AMI $36,700 $45,900 $55,100 $41,900 $52,400 $62,900 $47,150 $58,975 $70,800 $52,400 $65,500 $78,600 $56,000 $70,425 $84,850 $60,800 $76,000 $91,200 $65,000 $81,225 $97,450 $69,150 $86,475 $103,800 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Traditional Low Income Housing Concerns • Opposition to low income housing in existing neighborhoods. • Avoid "warehousing" or creating low income housing in only one area of a development or a section of the city. • Establishing communities with integrated low income housing opportunities and services. • Maintaining low income housing prices in a market driven environment • Rental units account for 410/6 of housing needs in Spokane - Development of low income rental units falls far short of demand Obstacles to Low Income Housing • Land Availability &Costs — (Regulatory Restrictions for MF) • Inadequate Transportation Planning • Energy Costs • Insurance Premiums • Material Costs • Labor Costs Affordable Housing Solutions • Government subsidy is not the long term solution. - Government budgets are stretched beyond their ability to maintain existing infrastructure and facilities. • A strategy to prioritize government funding of affordable housing is destined to fail. The need is too great, and there are not enough dollars. Affordable Housing Solutions • The only effective strategy is to establish meaningful land use policies and incentives for the private sector to develop affordable housing opportunities. • Our land use policies need to change significantly to meet the continuing disparity between wages and lifestyle costs.. Land, Use Strategies • Density Bonus Program - If the developer builds affordable units, additional market -rate units will be allowed. • Inclusionary Zoning - Benefits to developers to offset costs associated with developing affordable units. • Small Lot Ordinance - Cottage Housing Ordinance • Revise Parking Standards - Residents who qualify for low income housing have fewer cars. Financial Strategies • Community Land Trusts - Land is held in trust by a non - profit. Residents own structure and have a 99 year lease on land. • Employer Assisted Housing - Many examples of employers assisting in the development of housing opportunities for their employees. - Employers are offering housing subsidies in many high cost areas. • Location Efficient Mortgages - Allow homebuyers to qualify for higher mortgages based on lower transportation costs for those neighborhoods developed close to work and services. Regulatory Strategies • Reduction or exemption of sewer and water capitalization fees and reduction in impact fees for low income housing. • Require a portion of the real estate excise tax_ to fund infrastructure costs for non - profit housing providers • Property Tax Exemptions - Downtown or Center designations under the Comprehensive Plan • Tax Increment Financing "TIF" Districts - Specific requirements for affordable housing • Provision in our zoning code allowing a broader range of housing types, smaller lots, and a finer integration of MF and SF housing. • Government owned surplus property should be sold or leased for affordable housing where deemed appropriate. Affordable Housing Opportunities • It is critical that our community meet the housing needs of our workforce and low income citizens. • Spokane's affordable living standards have traditionally been a strength that has driven our economic vitality and our quality of life. • In the end, implementing "Smart" land use policies, combined with innovative transportation planning, is the most effective means to maintaining affordability and Spokane's existing quality of life. Developing Affordable Housing "The twentieth century was about getting around. The twenty -first century will be about staying in a place worth staying in." James Howard Kunstler AFFORDABLE HOUSING NOTES AUSTIN, TEXAS - - The Austin Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) issued $2.2 million in bonds to the Rental Housing Development Assistance Program to assist in financing affordable rental projects for low- income households. - Applicants for bond funding should target households earning at or below 30 percent of Austin's median family income and cannot serve households earning more than 50 percent of Austin MFI. - Mixed - income developments can receive funding provided bond funds are used to develop only affordable units directed at lower- income households. - Eligible funding activities include acquisition of real property, new construction and rehabilitation of properties for affordable rential housing. SUPPORT H.R. 2895 — THE NATIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND BILL - The goal of the Trust Fund is to construct, rehabilitate, and preserve 1,500,000 units of housing over the next io years The bill focuses on the production and preservation of rental housing that is affordable for extremely low income (ELI or 30% AMI or less) families, by establishing, the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund The combined amount estimated to be in the Fund for the first year is $800 million to $1 billion (fund does not depend on appropriations) Three- quarters (75 %) of the Fund must be used for ELI families, with 30% of the total going to even poorer families, those whose income is no more that the federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit `level. The remaining 25% of the Fund can go to households with incomes up to 60% AMI, until the Fund reaches $2 billion a year. - After that threshold is passed, 25% of the Fund can be used for households with incomes up to 80% AMI. - Scheduled for a floor vote in house in September — get more co- sponsors (there is 41 as of right now) http:/ /www.nlihc.org /detaillarticle.cfm ?article id= 446.8dd =22 ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA - the goal of the relocation policy is to enable displaced tenants to move directly to decent, structurally safe and affordable replacement housing convenient to their place of employment/ or school - Owners /developers seeking County funding or special development exceptions are expected to do the following • Retain affordable units • Develop a relocation plan o Complete a tenant questionnaire • Communicate intent regarding property • Provide tenants with a least 12o day notice to vacate • Provide relocation assistance • Provide a relocation payments • Provide regular reports to County staff - Responsibility for monitoring and reporting the implementation of these guidelines rests with the Department of Community Planning and the Department of Housing and Development. http: / /www.arlingtonva.us/ Departments /CPHD /Documents /i555relocation guidelines pdf MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA - Relocation Policy — accepted by the City Council in 2004 - This policy applies to all private development receiving direct or indirect City financing, which will result in the displacement of residential or business tenants. - Displacement Plans • The developer shall provide the City with a plan at the time of the financial commitment request • Individual occupant data stating: income, sex, age and size of rent level • This plan must be approved by the funding agency of the City before financial assistance being requested is approved Notices o Preliminary Notice ■ Within 20 days of the execution of the purchase agreement, the developer shall give a written notice to each tenant which shall include the following: • The type of development planned • How and when the tenant will be affected • A statement as to whether or not the tenant is an eligible occupant (i.e. has resided in the unit for more than go days) • A statement that the tenant may be eligible for continued occupancy or relocation assistance • A statement that the tenant should not move until they have discussed relocation with the developer; that if they move without contacting the developer, they may wave their right to assistance o Notice of Relocation Eligibility • Within 3o days of firm commitment of sale, the developer shall inform each tenant in writing whether they will be offered the right to continued occupancy, and the terms of such occupancy, including whether or not any temporary relocation will be necessary • If the tenant is not offered continued occupancy, then the notice must inform the tenant of the right to relocation services, and benefits and the name and address of the person(s) to contact to discuss relocation Continued Occupancy o If the tenant is offered continued occupancy, the developer's contract must include a maximum housing cost for the period of continued occupancy and shall follow these guidelines • There shall not be ant unreasonable increase in occupancy cost in the first year • The rent can be increased at the beginning of the second year The rest of this policy is very comprehensive and it covers: - Temporary Displacement - Replacement Housing Services and Assurances - Rental Assistance - Moving Expenses for Permanent Displacement • Furnished • Unfurnished Benefits for Non - Eligible Occupants • These individuals will be eligible for $250.00 moving expenses • Shall be informed of at least two available rental units which are comparable in terms of size and if possible are located in the same area Waiver of Benefits - Contract with the City - Appeals City of Tacoma If you develop affordable emergency, transitional, rental or homeownership housing for lower income individuals and families, your program may qualify for Housing and Urban Development (HUD) finds to help you with the purchase, renovation or construction of housing within the City of Tacoma The Tacoma Community Development Authority (TCRA) is a board who administers and approves funding for housing and business programs in cooperation with the City of Tacoma. They provide two housing development funding rounds per year, in the Spring and Fall, to provide you with the opportunity to apply for the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership (HOME) funds for your housing project. New York City in 2006, Mayor Bloomberg appointed a task force of developers, low income housing advocates, bankers and others to look into whether the 421 -A Program (a program where developers have received a 10 -25 year exemption from the increase in property taxes that results from their work) should be revamped to better encourage construction of badly needed low -priced housing o The Administration Proposed ■ Limiting the Benefit for Market -Rate Apartments ■ Expanding the Area in which some Lower- Income Units would be Required ■ Setting up a Trust Fund to Subsidize Housing Development in Poor Neighborhoods The City Council passed a version of the plan o Under the council's bill, the lower - income units in designated neighborhoods were to be affordable to New Yorkers making no more than 80% of the median household income The Version of the Plan passed the Legislature in June o This version added ■ 20% of the units in most rental buildings receiving the tax break would have to be affordable to people making on average no more than 90% of the median income for the area ■ That could include some apartments for households making as much as 120% of the median income and some making as little as 60% or less, as long as the average for the lower -priced units was 90% ■ In co-ops and condominiums, 20% of all units would have to be affordable to people making no more than 125% of median income ■ If signed into law the provisions would go into effect next summer Mayor Bloomberg — "We will continue to encourage the construction of thousands of low- income homes while also allowing the city the flexibility to provide 421 -1 benefits to most middle- income homes" - the administration's program is aimed at creating and preserving 165,000 lower income homes by 2013 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE MINUTES i Mayors Affordable Housing Task Force Meeting r' August 7, 2007 City Hall, Council Briefing Center In Attendance: Jerrie Allard, Ray Rieckers, Chris Batten, Larry; Soehren; Nancy McLaughlin, Terry Lawhead, Tom Tremaine, Christine McCabe, Marilee Roloff, Christine Barada, Roe Shogan, Rob McCann, Alice Watts, Jim Kolva *ffNave, Timm Ormsby, Cindy Algeo, Mick McDowell, Cathy Mann, Marty Dickinson, Teresa Bruin, Susan King, Arlene Patton Meeting began at 3:30pm Marty Dickinson stated that a central goal of the remaining Task Force meetings is to fine tune a relocation ordinance for the City Council. ' Specifically, what must be required of a developer and the City. Teresa Brum shifted the focus to the current problems facing the Otis residents. She relayed the position of the Mayor's office that leaving the Otis open for transition is not a viable option. Chris Batten insisted that leaving the Otis open for an extended period was not economically feasible. Council President Shogan praised Chris Batten's efforts at finding a solution even though his proposals were rejected by the Council. Chris Batten vowed to remain proactive in working with various social services to accommodate the residents. He reiterated that all of the buildings in question were continuously losing money. He asked if the City's decision came with a plan for relocation of Otis tenants after September 1. Council President Shogan stated that from the $250,000 funded through SNAP, they can allocate $10,000 on their own and could subcontract the position of administering the remaining funds. This is additional to the Mayor's $10,000.` Ray Rieckers mentioned that $8,350 of City and Rencorp money has been spent thus far. He suggested paying agencies $300, per placement. Chris Batten expressed that Rencorp's money must be utilized towards relocation and not for continued operation overhead. Ray Rieckers stated that all $20,000 must finance relocation expenses. He expressed concern regarding the administrative costs incurred by the agencies. Cindy Algeo addressed an obstacle towards utilizing the Turner building (30 units, renovated by Mick McDowell, suitable for ex- offenders). for housing displaced residents. She noted a $140 per unit gap between what Pioneer desires and what HUD will provide. She suggested that either the City subsidize the gap or that Mick McDowell lower the rent. She added that ex- offender reentry legislation has $4 million for two pilot groups in the state. Tomlinson -Black is discussing a solution with the owners of the Norman and Jefferson. She revealed that the framework of the Norman and Jefferson is still in place and the buildings could possibly be.rehabilitated.for low- income housing.; Chis Batten warned that such a project would be far too expensive because those buildings are too badly damaged. Mick McDowell stated that the Turner building is for sale. Council.President. Shogan asserted that,the City will not subsidize rent and that the $250,000 must be allocated'for emergency relocation only. He added that a choice must be made between moving the residents without administration or utilizing Pioneer Human %Health Services. Mick McDowell expressed that Pioneer would be willing to lower costs. Arlene Patton stated that Shelter Plus Care:costs.about $320 per unit. Jerrie Allard stated that in order to qualify for Shelter Plus Care an individual must be homeless/disabled.. Tom Tremaine added that many Otis residents do not qualify for Shelter Plus. Ray Rieckers assured-that HUD might be flexible. The gap might only amount to $50,000 per year,. Cindy Algeo added that Pioneer will take a $50,000 loss until 2010. Jim Kolva stated that as a habitable, vacant building no other immediate solution exists besides the Turner. He suggested that the Department of Corrections contribute some money for services for ex- offenders. Alice Watts expressed the willingness of the Department of Corrections to consider the matter. Marty Dickinson requested that Alice Watts, Jim Kolva, Tom Tremaine, Cindy Algeo, and Mick McDowell hold a separate meeting on how to negotiate a deal with Pioneer. Chris Batten reiterated that the Turner building is the best immediate option for displaced residents. Council President Shogan addressed the need for an administrator for negotiating with tenants, perhaps SNAP or Pioneer. Mick McDowell suggested Linda and Jason Wolfe as a possibility. Marty Dickinson mentioned that a tent city is no longer an option. She informed the . Task Force that the State is considering a proposal for the 2008 session limiting city and county relocation compensation to 3 months rent and 120 days notice. Council President Shogan suggested that the City should pattern their relocation ordinance around the current State ordinance. This requires $2,200 per unit split equally amongst the City and- the developer, - $2,000 will be used for direct assistance and $200 for administrative costs. Tenants receive a 90 day notice of relocation. The landlord must provide a list of tenants and a notice of demolition if applicable. Surplus funds -are refunded to the developer and the City. Mick McDowell approved of the City's willingness to pay half the relocation costs and forecasted that the area's developers would welcome it. Chris Batten expressed concern that tenants might cease paying their rent upon receiving the notice of relocation. A 90 day relocation notice could potentially deprive a landlord of 3 months worth. of rental income on a building already operating at a loss. He asked to be granted legal recourse to evict delinquent tenants. Timm Ormsby inquired whether or not the ordinance reflects the values of the community. Jim Kolva warned that owners of closed buildings might not be able to pay relocation costs if their building is in bad condition and of low property value. Jeff Nave asserted that increased regulation can inhibit development of low - income as .well as luxury housing. Chris Batten inquired if the $2,200 figure is based on the Seattle real- estate market rather than Spokane's. Teresa Brum suggested an analysis of the average annual cost to the City and from what fund it would be paid. Marty Dickenson asked the Task Force to arrive at a set of formal recommendations by mid - September. . The meeting adjourned at 5:00pm Mayor's Affordable Housing Task Force Meeting August 21, 2007 3:30pm Council Briefing Room, City Hall In Attendance: Marty Dickinson, Steve Cervantes, Mick McDowell, Timm Ormsby, Ray Rieckers, Jeff Nave, Terry Lawhead, Larry Soehren, Council President Joe Shogan, . Tom Tremaine, Marilee Roloff, Christine McCabe, Bev Gates, Cathy Mann, Susan King, Jerrie Allard, Teresa Brum The meeting commenced at 130. Marty Dickinson began by underscoring that the intended purpose. of the meeting is to provide the Mayor With a list of pros and cons for each proposal; She also suggested that specific potential "flip" buildings be identified and asked the Task Force to list specific incentives to offer developers. Susan King summarized the content of an earlier phone meeting which concluded that Linda and Jason Wolfe would be best suited to run the Turner Building. Spokane Neighborhood Action Programs or Catholic Charities could provide social services.. Mick McDowell affirmed that he did discuss the matter with.Jason Wolfe. Mr. Wolfe would, charge $295 per unit per month. Rent. revenues would .only cover, $9,000 of $16,000 in operating expenses. Council President Shogan suggested that Otis,residents continue to pay their current rate at the Turner which would be somewhat higher than anticipated. Mick McDowell proposed that 1.8 million be raised to purchase the Turner Building and secure it for long -term use. Marty Dickinson mentioned that the Turner Building contains only 30; units, enough to house only about 30% of the Otis' residents. Mick McDowell replied that the building is actually licensed for 42 beds, nearly 50% of the Otis population. Council President Shogan insisted that the Turner Building is currently the best multi -unit available. Other options consist mostly of one or two unit dwellings. Teresa Brum asked if Jason Wolfe is interested in purchasing the building. Mick McDowell replied that Mr. Wolfe would probably be interested. Cathy Mann inquired as to when the building would be ready for occupancy. Mick McDowell answered that the building is ready to be move into immediately. He l added that Pioneer Human Health Services must reduce'his debt by $250,000 in order to be released from their current lease. Council President Shogan offered to provide a packet of homeless services to the Task Force members at the next meeting. Mick McDowell suggested inquiring the amount the Bail Bond Company and the Attorney's Office are paying on their current lease and when it expires. Marty Dickinson asked that independent entities and the City talk to Mick McDowell, before the next Task Force meeting. She shifted the focus to the long -term City relocation policy. The Task Force members studied handouts describing Seattle's relocation policy. Mick McDowell suggested that relocation assistance be based on a measurable index like rent amount. Assistance should be limited to two months rent. Ray Rieckers raised concern that the problem is City -wide and not confined to the downtown area. Families with children are also affected by displacement. Timm Ormsby stated that costs associated with the screening process, utility deposits, and moving expenses should be included. Cathy Mann expressed that the cap -per unit restriction needs some contingencies for live - in caregivers and other similar situations. Chris Batten warned that, too often, many so- called caregivers are actually stowaways taking advantage of the tenant. Because of this, such contingencies would require careful review. Cathy Mann raised the concern that apartment upgrades might not have to abide by the same rules as condominium conversions. Chris Batten inquired whether all landlords will be required to pay relocation costs if they are renovating or closing substandard property. Timm Ormsby assured that exceptions can be made. Chris Batten contended that landlords should be compensated for operating at a loss beyond their wishes. Tom Tremaine asserted that building owners should change their business strategy sooner rather than operate at a loss for a lengthy period and abruptly displacing tenants. Bev Gates took exception to the 90 day relocation policy and suggested a compromise of 45 -60 days. Timm Ormsby countered that Seattle's 90 day policy is based on experience and not arbitrary. He proposed researching how Seattle's city government arrived at the number. Ray Rieckers pointed out that 90 days coincides with how long Spokane is taking to relocate New. Madison residents. Tom Tremaine insisted that 90 days probably would not impose undue burden on landlords especially in the case of disabled tenants., Chris Batten responded by questioning Mr. Tremaine's subjective definition of undue. burden. Marty Dickinson concluded the meeting at 5:OOpm The following information was written on the meeting whiteboard: Who is affected? — Low income tenants earn less than or equal to 50% area median income. Does this apply to Spokane? A measurable index like rent? (don't set them up to fail) We need to consider this city wide — i.e. families Per unit cap (will vary in cases of SRO or multi -room) CONCERN: single units with 2 people Review the 10 year homeless plan to consider those most in need 0 -339 = need (income level) 30& AM You must start with 50& AM (being the maximum) go from there to review /evaluate Where does this apply? City wide Has to be jurisdiction wide — could be challenged legally Who evaluates the qualifier for relocation assistance? Number of days — we need to strike a balance CONCERN: 90 days notice = no pay from tenant PRO: tenant must be "current" to receive relocation assistance PRO: City is to require "good standing" i.e. residential tenant act CONCERN: Timing issues of Seattle Ordinance i.e. six months and notification period. Buildings operating at loss - what is threshold for - building owner? CONCERN: 30 days is not sufficient NOTE: tenant list provided the same day 90 day notice is issued NO ONE ELSE is potentially eligible 30 days minimum 90 days maximum —possible compromise = 45 days? The longer amount of time allows, hopefully for less risk of legal mitigation. 90 days — why Seattle chose this number Match V. S. no match — who are the parties? Next Meeting: Dollar amounts, percent breakdown, who is exempt? Mayor's Affordable Housing Task Force Meeting Tuesday, September 0, 2007 City Hall, Council Briefing Room In Attendance: Teresa Brum, Jerrie Allard, Rob McCann, Jeff Nave, Terry Lawhead, Cindy Algeo, Christine McCabe, Arlene Patton, Marilee Roloff; Tom Tremaine, Ray Rieckers, Bev Gates, Christine Barada, Randy Fewel, Alice Watts, Larry Soehren, Jim Kolva, Timm Ormsby, Chris Batten, Steve Cervantes, Cathy Mann, Marty Dickinson, Melora Sharts Marty Dickinson began the meeting at 3:30pm. Cindy Algeo reviewed an earlier conference call regarding the best use of the Turner Building's 28 units. She also announced that One - Stop - Housing currently offers : . approximately 50 one - bedroom units albeit at higher rental rates than the Otis residents are accustomed. Ray Rieckers mentioned that under the State's Offender Re -Entry program 1.8 million dollars is available statewide ($440,000 for Spokane County) primarily for the purchase of affordable housing. He suggested that this money could help pay for the Turner . Building. Jeff Nave inquired as to whether Pioneer Human Health Services is a better administrative option than local entities like SNAP or Spokane Housing Authority. Cindy Algeo explained that Pioneer has been active in Spokane for many years and should, in fact, be considered a local entity. Ray Rieckers noted that Pioneer has access to the State's housing trust fund. Jim Kolva endorsed Pioneer as the best administrative option for the Turner Building. Cindy Algeo added that Pioneer already has a lease on the building. Chris Batten asked if Jason or Linda Wolfe constitute an administrative option.. Marty Dickinson stated that Pioneer has consistently expressed greater willingness to accept the task than the Jason and Linda Wolfe. , Tom Tremaine insisted that unless Pioneer has been relieved of their contractual obligation to the Turner Building than the City must deal with them. Melora Sharts reported that according to Jason Wolfe, Linda Wolfe is not interested in the position. Likewise, Jason Wolfe primarily provides housing and not services. Timm Ormsby proposed summarizing the number'ofpeople immediately displaced, Pioneer's financial needs per year /per tenant, the total monthly fiscal liability and a list of various funding sources. Cindy Algeo presented that Pioneer requires $556 per unit /per month. The projected annual loss is $82,000. She also warned that Shelter Plus Care funds might be difficult to utilize towards the Turner Building. Jerrie Allard affirmed that certain criteria must be applied when using Shelter Plus Care funds. She recommended discussing this matter in a separate meeting. She warned that too long of a delay might result in a loss of the grant. Its deadline is October 13`x'. Tom Tremaine inquired whether all Otis residents qualify for Shelter Plus Care. He also wondered if the Turner will be "required to house all Shelter Plus Care qualifiers not limited to Otis residents. Chris Batten recommended housing displaced residents in the Turner Building in a timely manner since, despite the annual loss, the building is far more costly vacant. Steve Cervantes suggested operating the building at a loss in the short term while securing additional funding.sources as a long term strategy for solvency. Tom Tremaine asked if the City has negotiated access to Otis residents' financial circumstances. Larry Soehr n inquired of any laws preventing sex offenders at the Turner Building. Marty Dickinson replied that the YWCA/YMCA children's programs/daycares exist in close proximity to the Turner Building. Alice Watts noted an RCW stating that level III sex offender housing cannot exist within 880 feet of a school. Larry Soehren warned that the Turner might be too close. Alice Watts recalled that Pioneer previously housed Federal Work Releases in the Turner. These seldom included sex offenders. Ray Rieckers countered that the facilities are daycares and not schools. Therefore they might be exempt from the current restrictions. Chris Batten suggested that a relocation team be assembled in haste. Cindy Algeo mentioned that a monetary resource must be selected to fund the relocation team. Ray Rieckers proposed meeting with Chris Batten, _Rob McCann, Marilee. Roloff, and Cathy Mann. Rob McCann cautioned that the Otis tenants will be more difficult than the New Madison tenants. Marty Dickinson suggested a Friday meeting between Cathy Mann, Chris Batten, Ray Rieckers, Steve Cervantes, Rob McCann, and Marilee Roloff. Cathy Mann asked that Dave Bilsland also be present. Teresa Bruin negotiated 9am as a meeting time in the council briefing room. Marty Dickinson asked Dave Bilsland to .encourage residents to disclose their personal information to the relocation team to better assist them. Rob McCann warned that many displaced residents will go. to the street within 24 -48 hours. Chris Batten stated his opposition to relocation subsidies for.rent- delinquent tenants. Marty Dickinson noted that the Public and the City Council might not approve of taxpayer funds used towards parole violators. :She suggested that Timm Ormsby consult with Mayor Hession on the matter. Larry Soehren proposed that Police Chief Anne Kirkpatrick be present, in addition. Marty Dickinson shifted the focus of the meeting towards other potential "flips ". The task force identified the Briggs building (switching to condominiums). The rehabilitated Borning building will be occupied by families thus affecting sex offenders in the neighboring Helen Apartments. The Bell - Franklin building can possibly be rehabilitated into low- income housing. 5th & Washington — 52 residents .face displacement from various buildings. Saint. Claire Apartments is listed for sale. Maple -Hurst changes hands every few years. Marty Dickinson suggested listing potential inventory and flip risks. The meeting was adjourned at 5: 1 Opm. The next meeting was scheduled for 3:30pm Tuesday, September 18'h in the Council Briefing Room. j Meeting Notes Mayor's Affordable Housing Task Force Home Finders Team Meeting Friday, September 14, 2007 8:30am City Hall Conference Room 5A In Attendance: Sheila Morley, Dia Maurer, Lieutenant Rex Olson, Teresa Brum, Jerrie Allard, Ray Rieckers, Shelly Ray, Susan King, Patty Norton, Dale Briese, Chris Batten, Bob Peeler, Marilee Roloff, Council President Joseph Shogan, Dave Bilsland, Marlene Feist Teresa Brum began the meeting at 8:30am. Sheila Morley reported that the Home Finders Team has been present at the Otis twice, once on Monday and once on Wednesday. Bob Peeler noted that much frustration and anger remains among the residents. The team is trying to secure preference on various apartment lists in light of the Otis tenants' unique situation. Two moving companies have been contacted to assist the residents. Council President Shogan inquired as to how many tenants have been unequivocally placed. Bob Peeler responded that eight have been placed thus far. 15 Veterans and numerous elderly residents should be eligible for certain services. Shelly Ray offered to contact the director of Regional Homeless Services. 17 tenants have self - identified mental health issues. Bob peeler suggested that income verifications be obtained today and on Monday. Marilee Roloff asked if Kiemle and Hagood will give senior citizens preference. Dale Briese answered affirmatively adding that citizens 62 years and older will receive preference. Ray Rieckers inquired as to the number of recovering criminals to be relocated. Lieutenant Olson replied that 13 level 2 or 3 sex offenders currently reside at the Otis. 21 total sex offenders are living there but level one offenders seldom pose a serious problem. The Turner Building will not require any special permits to house sex offenders. Its proximity to the YMCA will not violate any sex offender laws. Jerrie Allard noted that the YMCA has expressed serious concerns. Council President Shogan suggested that someone talk to the YMCA regarding their concerns. He noted that the lower - than - expected number of sex offenders poses a unique problem. The City expected at least 30 offenders... With only 21, the potential for vacancies at the Turner Building might be problematic since non - offenders might not wish to live there. Chris Batten reported that he had contacted about 200 landlords and acquired a good ; mailing /phone list. He also bought a rental directory for the tenants. He also contacted. "Bonded ". Since, boxes have proven surprisingly expensive, all of the area's grocery stores have been contacted for donations. Additional boxes will be purchased if necessary. Council President Shogan thanked Mr. Batten and hoped that his efforts would serve as an example for other developers: Jerrie Allard noted that 3 departments have moved within City Hall. Many boxes will be left over from this. ordeal. Marilee Roloff noted that Sonderin(ph) is a good source for boxes. Chris Batten stated that boxes will be left in the Otis lobby. Moving carts are available there already. Sheila Morley requested that all agencies keep track of hours and mileage in order to better calculate the total cost of this relocation. Bob Peeler expressed that the situation might ultimately prove positive for the residents by placing them with the services they need. Council President Shogan promised to continue pursuing new funding sources for the Home Finder's Team. He; mentioned-that Rick Lake at Windermere might be able to secure an apartment sale for Inland Empire Rental Resources. He reported that he . . emailed Cindy Algeo a map of the 5t' & Washington block which includes the Renwood Apartments. He inquired as to the Washington Apartments' current ownership. . Bob Peeler answered that the Wolfe's currently own the Washington Apartments. Lieutenant Olson noted that many sex offenders reside there, possibly as many as 40, who would be displaces should that building close. Council President Shogan suggested that a contingency plan be devised in the event of a failure to relocate the residents. Hotel rooms might be a temporary solution, albeit an extremely expensive one. Bob Peeler suggested that Todd(ph), owner of the Shangri La, recently bought the -West Wind. Marilee Roloff mentioned that the Department of Corrections claimed no responsibility for providing housing for ex- felons. She proposed encouraging the legislature to change this. Council President Shogan stated that the City's lobbyists will be in town next month for discussion on the matter. He expressed skepticism of requiring the Department of Corrections to build housing. Lieutenant Olson noted that the Department of Corrections' nascent "Reentry Program" is currently struggling to attain viability. Council President•Shogan added that the program consists of two $900,000 projects and does not pay for infrastructure. He promised to discuss the matter further with the F lobbyists. Dave Bilsland reported that the Otis residents are comforted that people arrived ,to help. He expressed concern for those ineligible for assistance from social programs. Dale Briese observed that aggressive competition for available units is increasing. Bob Peeler reflected on his efforts to discourage the tenants from disclosing to landlords that they previously resided at the Otis. Marilee Roloff mentioned that two fundraisers.are being held for the Otis residents, a concert and a "dunking booth ". Council President Shogan expressed concern regarding rumors that the "dunking booth" proceeds actually benefited other causes. Marilee Roloff requested that Council President Shogan write a letter to the "Inlander" thanking themfor their recent Otis-article. Council President Shogan recalled having already written them in gratitude. Bob Peeler suggested distinguishing Department of Corrections- friendly land lords. Shelly Ray expressed her belief that the Department of Corrections should use their knowledge of ex- felons in helping them fmd housing. She reported that she is currently working to have a health professional present at the Otis to determine eligibility for services. Lieutenant Olson asked if anyone has contacted United Way. Jerrie Allard replied that she has a meeting scheduled with United Way's new CEO. }, Marilee Roloff expressed her desire that the Homeless Outreach Team be present to assist the residents. Bob Peeler noted that Supportive Living is already there. Ray Rieckers proposed that the Task Force write a letter to the County Commissioner for Mental Health: Shelly Ray expressed uncertainty regarding the Commissioner's willingness to fund the project. Council President Shogan stated that Christine Barada is the best contact. He asked that the members determine what County funds might be available. Marilee Roloff noted that no harm could come of asking the County for funds especially considering the amount contributed from the- City's general fund. Teresa Brum promised to obtain an update from Ms. Barada at the next Task Force Meeting. She asked if these weekly Home Finder's Team Meetings are helpful. Bob Peeler answered that the next meeting should take place in two weeks. Dave Bilsland asked if the City Council could enact a "freeze" on property conversions in order to abate further displacement problems. Council President Shogan replied that such an ordinance runs contrary to State Law. Ray Rieckers added that the Otis is in no condition to continue normal operations anyway. The meeting concluded at 9:30am. Mayor's Affordable Housing Task Force Tuesday, October 16, 2007, 3:30pm City Hall, Council Briefing Room In Attendance: Bev Gates, Chris Batten, Nancy McLaughlin, Cindy Algeo, Tom Tremaine, Marilee Roloff, Arlene Patton, Ray Rieckers, Rob McCann, Larry Soehren, Joe Shogan, Jeff Nave, Mick McDowell, Christine McCabe, Jerrie Allard Susan King, Dave Bilsland, Cathy Mann, Kristine Barada, Pia. Hansen, Megan Dillon; Kevin Graman, Tobby Hatley, Shannon Meagher, Terri Symbol, Tracy Reich, Chris Venne Meeting Notes: Agenda Review: The Task Force discussed ongoing issues of replacing lost downtown affordable housing units, identifying incentives for affordable housing development, and the draft relocation ordinance. They also reviewed a list of downtown housing units and noted opinions on those that may "flip" in the near future. The group wished to add "meetings,to continue working on these ongoing issues. The Task Force may delay issuing a report to continue deliberations or report progress as of October 30 with follow-up committee,work. Home Finder's Update: Susan King distributed an October 16 email updating progress placing Otis tenants: f ■ 5 sex offenders found housing ■ 41 tenants have moved ■ 12 tenants are moving within 1 week ■ 5 tenants received Section 8 rent vouchers ■ 6 tenants are receiving RSN or DSHS assistance ■ 4 tenants have a moving plan in place ■ 9 tenants refuse to make contact ■ Home Finders have worked with 77 households Service providers estimated spending $38,000 of City contracted funds and $7,000 of owner's funds for relocation assistance. Some tenants need substantial services. DSHS and Adult Protective Services (APS) are now helping. Time is needed to complete all possible tenant moves. Examples of time requirements included: ■ Section 8 vouchers require tenant qualification and unit inspection. ■ APS needs 30 -45 days to place severely handicapped tenants. ■ One tenant working on closing the purchase of a mobile home. ■ 9 tenants refusing contact may require owner's action of eviction notice or 48 hour inspection notice. Home Finders will continue attempts to contact. Consider using hotels as temporary housing or completing moves while owner pursues tenants rebuffing Home Finders contacts. RenCorp's tenant contact was reduced by waiving October rent payments. RenCorp extended the tenant vacate deadline and offered to keep Otis open for City payment of monthly operating expense estimated at $23,000. This expenditure would require City Council approval based on the Council's resolution and City contract. Turner Update: Task Force members understood that NEWHS ordered an appraisal suggesting progress toward a purchase offer. Also, NEWHS scheduled a meeting with City staff regarding the Turner Building and Shelter Plus Care contract. Local Affordable Housing Funding: Cindy Algeo stated Spokane nonprofits are pursuing additional local affordable housing funding. They considered Seattle and Tacoma levy efforts and outcomes. Local government bonds are also an option. Issues include geographic scope, household income levels, fund thru property tax or fees, and type of assistance (e.g., homebuyer, rent assistance, build units, shelters, etc). Other jurisdictions recommended polling voters on housing priorities and approval rates. Ordinance: Joe Shogan stated October 11 Task Force meeting comments were incorporated into the current ordinance draft. Discussion items included: adjust/remove $2,200 cap on relocation assistance, require tenants to vacate a unit before receiving funds, exclude teriants evicted for cause, and deduct refunded deposit from property owner's payment. Final Meeting Agenda Items: Task Force members wished to dedicate the next meeting to information on affordable housing incentives and delay the final meeting into November. They proposed the following meeting schedule: October 17 Draft Ordinance Follow Up October 19 Home Finders Committee October 26 Home Finders Committee October 30 Task Force — Affordable Housing Incentives November 13 Task Force — Final Meeting �u� AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE I ' INCENTIVE IDEAS /OPTIONS LOrandum To: Mary Verner, City Council, City of Spokane From: Helen Stevenson, Spokane Housing Venture -7 1 S L , J .1 r l 5 t tom. i2 Date: 7/13/2007 �, Re: Low Income Housing Tax Credit Point Criteria Request Thank you for the call this afternoon. I am excited and pleased to provide you with the information requested regarding the Low I&ome Housing Tax Credit Program (LIHTC) and how Sp_ ok a could coon a more level playing field with West coast projects. Ash xp� lained ttyo �. with th�nnint �trncfire�b g what it is currently, Spokane r�roiects have had a di ffcult ti Oting f r 4i . �lP rPSnnrce. LIHTC's are available on an annual basis to h State .of Washington and are alloc d through the Wash ni on State Housing Finance Commission (W�H -C). I have been successful (through my affiliation with Spo ane Tlousuig - V�iit�res receN g.;these credits on five of our affordable housing projects serving populations ranging from 0% of median to 60% of median income. Spokane Neighborhood Action Programs has one LIHTC proteet and aye een unsuccessful in getting su cient points to score high enough to complete their second phase even thoug they have a mg m p ace, including ding perm`ti s The V -SIVC, in their point criteria have determined that `Targeted Areas' may receive up to 7 aKftfio a_I_ points in their allocation plan if one of the following takes place and'" "i7re pro ect m it's =- A difficult development area (DDA) designated by the Secretary of the US Department of Housing and Urban Developme t (HU_D); • A qualified census tract (nCT) designated by the Secretary of HUD where 500/6 or more of the households have an income that is less than 60% of the area median gross incomes_ or • An are hief executive officer of the local iurisdiction as Eargetfor low- incnmP hnucnip �prvin� households at 0% o the area median ross f ... _ __,�._ income or below, and approved by the Commission. An additional 2 points may be scored if the entire pro,'ect is looated_in a targeted area and the development contributes to a Community Revitalization Plan (CRP). I've included the Qualified Allocation Plan (Exhibit B); Rules (Exhibit C) and Polic` M Exhibit D) for clarification of what the Commission requires for each of these. Please refer to Chapter 6, Section 12 for the Community Revitalization Pge auire ents, which seem very easily incorporated into a resolution especially for the- do "wntow ical d it andTse in neighborhoo such as Vest Central East Central. etc. Please re er to Page 63 for more ir4�on on the additional requirements of this CRP. In the past the Commission has required submission of some analysis of acreage contained in the targeted area as well as what kind of developments are currently located within the range. Since the City of Spokane already has designated C9MMu Development Block Grant Neighborhoods; Corridor and Employment Center designations, etc. some kind of study that meets this requirement July 13, 2007 probably has already been completed and most likely would suffice for adequate analysis required for approval. In 1999, I was successful in requesting and receiving a Spokane County Resolution (Resolution at atched) to provide a designation for development and preservation of aTfordab— 1 ing in order to score additional points to assure our success in receiving credits for 89 units of new construction. Once completed, I would be pleased to submit the resolution to the Commission for approval for any and all LIHTC projects being submitted in the future. The resolution would have to remain on the books until taken off by another resolution and we would need a letter similar to the one that the County did for our projects in the valley. As time goes on it has become more and more difficult for projects in Spokane County to score high enough to have access and use of this resource. Not for Profit sponsors are t on] entities that have access to th&C ds (this was adopted a few years ago) an it has been even more di lculf'� I r fhe few non profits in Spokane to compete because of the larger number of more sophisticated developers on the West side of the State. The Commission does limit the use of credits to 40% of King County but it has been increasingly difficult to build new construction units and ahnost as difficult to access rehab dollars from this source because of the pom�s cisu`i -u e. The Commission is in the process of re- defining how they determine the points, but in some cases some of their suggestions will further hobble our abilities to compete. I really appreciate your willingness and genuine concern for the folks in our community that face a housing crisis almost daily. Only through participation from our local government, local non profit service providers and housing providers, whether non profit or for profit, will we ever solve this problem. The Commission is holding it's annual Affordable Housing Conference in Spokane this year (they come here every other year) and I would encourage you to request that the Council meet jointly with Kim H eak abou a housing cnsi as downtown area oes throu rocess nf agntri fi ion. It is my understanding that Kin has o rmg folks to Spokane in Mid - September (after the conference) to assist us in working towards a housing lei. As you my know, we were unsuccessful (bv about 2000 voted in 1994 ins &kin usin levy. We believe -that we were unsuccessful due to the complexity of the levy request. This failed levy was put on the ballot by the then City Council under Resolution NO. CPR 93 -2; RES 93 -97 C30949 dated r Ray Reickers and I along with other SLIHC members have been discussing a new housing levy with simpler expectations which would allow more direct results. I submitted some information to Brad Stark at his request when I inquired as to whether a housing section could be added to the current Levy Lift (or whatever it's being called) and have heard nothing as yet. It would be extremely important to affordable housing if a levy could be discussed and hammered out. Of course, the City and County would need to take a lead role in it's development but from the affordable housing non profit perspective, now is a prime time for our community to move towards this. I would think that any use of these funds would have to be directed solely at 30% or below median income housing either in the form of housing rent subsidy, payments to for profit or non profit landlords or _.development of new housing with specific emphasis on a number of tits targeting this income population in light of the loss of downtown low income units. This would certainly make our work easier and would also allow us to develop more units to put on the ground in a more deliberate and Pffe tive ma=er 2 March 31, 1999 MEMORANDUM TO: WASHINGTON STATE HOUSING FINANCE COMMISSION FROM: HELEN STEVENSON, HOUSING ADMINISTRATOR RE: TAX CREDIT APPLICATION ITEM 18, TARGETED AREAS Attached to this memo please find the following information: • Approved Resolution signed by all three Spokane County Conu-nissioners designating an area of land as targeted for development of housing for persons at or below 80% of median income. • Letter from Kasey Kramer,. Director of Community Development Department of Spokane County advising me of the designation and how it came about. Summary of acreage included in the designated area as provided by Pioneer Title and detailed by Brian Royer, NRF staff member. In checking with the Spokane County Commissioner's office, once a Resolution has been approved and signed it becomes part of the Spokane County requirements. There are no appeal periods and cannot be changed without specific written approval to do so, in Resolution form by the Commissioner body. Please accept this as documentation for allowing Woodruff Heights Phase I to take the 5 points associated with Section 18 in the Tax Credit Application for 1999. S P O K A N H; March 23, 1999 �_ C O U N T Y COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DrvISION KASEY M. KRAMER, DIRECTOR Ms. Helen Stevenson, Administrator Northwest Regional Facilitators 525 East Mission Avenue Spokane, WA 99202 -1824 Re: Woodruff Heights Apartments Dear Helen: The Board of County. Commissioners of Spokane County has identified and targeted the area, pursuant to Resolution 99 -0192, dated March 23, 1999, for development and. preservation of affordable housing serving low- income households. The identified property is located in Census Tract 125, Block Group 1, and is occupied by (52.2 %) low and moderate income residents. The identified property is a qualified CDBG neighborhood for the purpose of targeting CDBG and HOME Program rehabilitation programs, that in the past were targeted for the Rental Rehabilitation and Section 312 Loan Programs. Please pass this information on to the Washington .State Housing Finance Commission for their review and approval. Please contact Tim Crowley at (509). 477 -2521 extension 41, if you have any questions or need additional information regarding the County's Housing and Community Development Consolidated Plan. Sincerely, Kase Y KramZr Director , Community Development Department PHONE: (509) 477 -2521 ENO"`a FAX: (509) 477 -2561 BROADWAY CENTRE BUILDING 721 N. JEFFERSON, SUITE 200, SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260 -0190 TDD: (509) 477 -2521 www.spokanecounty.org i1 BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON 99 0192 IN THE MATTER CONCERNING THE IDENTIFICATION OF A TARGETED AREA IN UNINCORPORATED SPOKANE COUNTY ) FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENCOURAGFNG DEVELOPMENT OF ) RESOLUTION HOUSING UNITS SPECIFICALLY DEVELOPED FOR PERSONS ) AT OR BELOW 80% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME ) WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Spokane Coun Washington, section 36.32:120(6), has the care of Coun roe ty' pursuant to the provisions of the Revised Code of h' p p rty and the management of County funds and business; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, has determined that there exists a need for affordable housing in Spokane County serving households whose incomes are not more than 80% of the area median income; and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County wishes to support and encourage the development of affordable housing in Spokane County serving household whose incomes are not more than 80% of the area median income- and WHEREAS, there exists the availability of undeveloped land within urban Spokane provide such housing; and County which, could be developed to WHEREAS, the undeveloped land lying South of Sprague, East of Farr Road, North of 8`" Avenue and West of Oberlin, in an unincorporated part of Spokane County, is available land which could support such housing; and WHEREAS, the development of this site as such affordable housing will help meet the County's need for affordable housing serving households whose incomes are not more than 80% of the area median income; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners supports and encoura� urban Spokane County. pp oes appropriate growth within the boundaries of BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County that: (1) Undeveloped land lying South of Sprague, East of Farr Road, North of 8`" Avenue and West of Oberlin, in an unincorporated suburban art of Spokane County, be designated as targeted for development of housing for persons at or below 80% of Median Income as determined by HUD, and (2) This designation does not limit development but rather encourage appropriate use of available land to meet a need within the community. „ 10 -tl ADOPTED THIS 23rd DAY OF March, 1999. A ATTEST: CCU VICKY M. DALTON CLE�OE_THE BOARD, BY- L . ANIELA ERICKSON, DEPUTY r - To: Helen Stevenson From: Brian Royer Date: March 2, 1999 RE: Acreage in special 80% target zone The Washington State Housing Finance Commission requested an analysis of acreage contained in the area Spokane County identified for targeting for housing development The following analysis was completed by me this date utilizing data obtained from the files of Pioneer Title. Identified acreage: Oberlin on East, Sprague on North, Farr on West and Eighth on South Total Acres: Soo Commercial, developed: 67 = 8% Residential, developed: 686.7 = 86% Undeveloped: 46.3 = 6% Of the 46.3 acres of undeveloped land within this designated area, Woodruff Heights Phase I is 1.6 acres, (3.4% of undeveloped land), Woodruff Heights Phase II is 1.6 acres, (3.4% of undeveloped land), and Village Apartments is 2.16 acres (4.7% of undeveloped land) for a total of 5.36 acres or, 11.5% of the undeveloped land. m LOW INCOME COALITION Dedicated solely to ending America's affordable housing crisis THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN A Potential Tool in the Affordable Housing Preservation Toolbox February 2007 NLIHC's RegWatch is supported by The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. 721 Fifteenth Street, NW, Sixth Flan • Washington, OC 20005 • let 2021662 -1530 • fax 202/393.1973 • twit inf o _nliko[g • htt�J/www.nlihu THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN A Potential Tool in the Affordable. Housing Preservation Toolbox Table of Contents What is the ConPlan? Housing and Community Development Needs Assessment Preservation Opportunities Housing Market Analysis Preservation Opportunities Fair Housing Preservation Opportunities_.. The Strategic .Plan Preservation.Opportunities The Annual Action Plan Preservation Opportunities The Five Stages of the ConPlan Process and Related Public Participation Preservation Opportunities Required Public Participation: Your Invitation to Be Involved Preservation Opportunities For More Information Appendix: Notes About Multifamily Data Sources Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 4 Page 6 Page 6 Page 7 Page 9 Page 11 . Page 12 Page 13 Page 15 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 i 3. The Consolidated Plan: A Potential Tool in the Affordable Housing Preservation Toolbox The Consolidated Plan (ConPlan) is a tool advocates can use to influence how federal housing and community development dollars are spent in their communities. The ConPlan is also an opportunity to highlight the need to preserve the existing stock of affordable housing. With the virtual elimination of federal resources for the construction of new public and assisted housing available to extremely low income people, maintaining previous years' federal investment in affordable housing is critical. It is worthwhile for advocates to consider getting language about preservation added to local and state ConPlans, language that: describes the nature and extent of need to . preserve affordable housing; makes preservation a high priority; and, directs federal and other resources toward preservation. This guide presents a sketch of the ConPlan document and the process for creating it. The guide also suggests where affordable housing preservation language can be inserted in the ConPlan document, as well as when during the ConPlan process such language can be inserted and the jurisdiction's actions monitored. Winning the inclusion of preservation language in the ConPlan does not guarantee that federal dollars will be allocated toward affordable housing preservation. However, it does strengthen opportunities to preserve affordable housing by establishing local public policy stepping stones that lend legitimacy and leverage for ongoing advocacy efforts. What Is the ConPlan? The Consolidated Plan, popularly called the ConPlan, merges into one process and one document all the planning and application requirements of four HUD block grants: HOME, Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), Emergency Shelter Grants (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for People With AIDS (HOPWA) grants. Annual performance reporting requirements of the four block grant programs are also merged into a set of documents called the CAPER. The ConPlan process and these four grant programs (in this guide, collectively referred to as "CPD" funds) are administered by HUD's Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD). States, large cities, and urban counties that get any of these grants must have a ConPlan. In addition, Public Housing Agency (PHA) Plans (see the companion guide, The PHA Plan: A Potential Tool in the Affordable Housing Preservation Tool Box) must be consistent with the ConPlan. Many states cite their ConPlans when establishing priorities for allocating Low Income Housing Tax Credits (see the companion guide, The .QAP: A Potential Tool in the Affordable Housing Preservation Tool Box). In brief, the ConPlan requires a jurisdiction to estimate housing needs for various types of housing and categories of households; it also calls for a discussion of the nature of the housing supply and the demand for different types of housing in the community. From this analysis of housing need, supply, and demand, a jurisdiction must create a long -range (5 -year) Strategic Plan which is a policy statement of its funding and program priorities for housing. Each year, a jurisdiction must prepare an Annual Action Plan which indicates how all available resources will be used to fund housing activities intended to work toward the priority housing goals set out in the Strategic Plan. What's In the ConPlan? There are a number of elements in the ConPlan. This section of the guide briefly describes the elements relevant to affordable housing preservation, and highlights affordable housing preservation opportunities in each element. The regulations are frequently cited in this guide; those for cities and counties are in the Section "200" series (e.g., (24 CFR 91.200]), while regs for states are in the Section "300" series (e.g., [24 CFR 91.300]). Housing and Community Development Needs Assessment The ConPlan must estimate housing needs for the upcoming five years. Regulations say the needs in the ConPlan should reflect the public participation process (see pages 13 and 17). Housing data must be based on Census data provided by HUD, as updated by any properly conducted local study or "any, other reliable source." NLIHC's Out of Reach (available at www.nlihc.org) is an excellent source of data, as is NLIHC's Local Area Low Income Housing Database ( www. nlihc. org /research/lalihd/ind6x.html). . [24 CFR 91305(a)] and [24 CFR 91.305(x)] The ConPlan must estimate housing needs by: • Income categories, including households with incomes: below 30% of the area median income (AMI), referred to as "extremely low" income; between 30% and 50 % of AMI ( "low" income); between 50% and 80% of AMI ( "moderate" income); and between, 80% and 95% of AMI ( "middle" income). • Tenure type (whether the household rents or owns). • Family type, including: small families (24 people); large families (5 +); individuals; and elderly households. • The number of people who pay too much for housing (over 30% and over.50% of. their income), live in very poor quality housing, or live in overcrowded housing. (24 CFR 91.205(b)(1)] and [24 CFR 91.305(b)(1)] A snap shot of the first three bullet items is presented on Table 2A of the ConPlan. The ConPlan must also estimate housing needs for: • Public Housing residents (does not apply to states). Families on the public housing and Section 8 waiting lists (does not apply to states). • Victims of domestic violence. • Persons with HIV /AIDS and persons with mental or physical disabilities. 2 Homeless facilities and services, discussed separately for individuals and for families, noting also the needs of those who have some form of shelter and those who do not. (A snap shot is presented on Table IA of the ConPlan.) o The need for facilities and services for homeless "subpopulations" (for example those with drug addictions) must be described. The ConPlan must describe the characteristics and needs of people who now have housing but who are threatened with homelessness. Supportive housing for elderly, frail elderly, and people with mental, physical, or developmental disabilities. (A snap shot is presented on Table 1 B of the ConPlan.) [24 CFR 91.205(b)(1) & (e) & (d)) and [24 CFR 91.305(c) & (d)) Preservation Opportunities and the Needs Assessment => Be an active part of the public input process (see pages 13 and 17) to ensure that preservation of affordable housing is identified, discussed, and given greater attention. Encourage public housing residents to talk about capital improvement needs. . Encourage residents of assisted housing to talk about poor maintenance of their projects or about time running out on the use restrictions" placed on their buildings. => Has the jurisdiction used the most up -to -date information? Have local planning bodies, universities; real estate associations, etc. conducted newer, independent studies? . -. Do the observations of residents suggest that changes have taken place, that the "official" data is now out of date? => Highlight data about the number of public and assisted housing units in the community. Point out how many people live in these units, and if possible what their income ranges are. Point out how many are elderly or handicapped. Remind the public about public housing and Section 8 voucher waiting lists. Look for the waiting list information in the Public. Housing Agency Plan (PHA Plan), Annual Plan template, Item 1.B.* Find your PHA Plan at www.hud.gov/officesZ]2ih/]2ha/ approved/. *As this guide went to press, HUD issued a notice proposing to eliminate the template. Check NUHC's RegWatch web page (www.nlihc.orFregwatch1,) to learn whether or to what extend any changes were made. The Housing Market Analysis Regulations require the ConPlan to contain a housing market analysis that includes a description of the supply of housing, demand for housing, and the condition and cost of housing. It must also show areas where low income people and different races and ethnic groups are concentrated (does not apply to states). [24 CFR 91.210(a)] and [24 CFR 01.310(a)] The Housing Market Analysis must include specific inventories, including: Identification of all public housing developments (does not apply to states) and: The number of units. Their physical condition and revitalization needs. [24 CFR 91.210(b)(1)] The number of units assisted with other federal, state, or local funds, such as Section 8, Low income Housing Tax Credits, and state or local housing trust funds (does not apply to states). • The type of household and income level served must be. described. • There must be. "an assessment of whether any units are expected to be lost from the inventory for any reason, such as the expiration of Section 8 contracts." [24 CFR 91.210)(2)] The facilities and services for homeless people, broken down by emergency shelter and transitional housing. [24 CFR 91.210(c)]'and [24 CFR 91.210(b)] The housing stock available to serve people with disabilities or with special needs, including people with AIDS (does not apply to states). The number of vacant.or abandoned buildings, and whether they can be rehabbed (does not apply to states). [24 CFR 91210(a)] Preservation Opportunities and the Housing Market Analysis => Remind the jurisdiction that there must be "an assessment of whether any units are expected to be lost from the inventory for any reason, such as the expiration of Section 8 contracts." -� Be sure this assessment is not only included, but accurate when the draft ConPlan comes out for comment. Get the jurisdiction to list which projects (and the number of units) in the next five years have Section 8 contracts expiring, subsidized FHA - insured mortgages [Section 236 or 221(d)(3)BMIR] coming to term, Low Income Housing Tax Credit (L EFITC) "compliance periods" ending, or Rural Development Section 515 mortgages with expiring terms or hints of prepayment. • A simple resource for much of this information is available at the National Housing Trust website, www.nhtinc.org /data_map.asp. See the Appendix to learn more about this source. • See the Appendix to learn more about the direct data sources available from HUD. Ask the jurisdiction to ask HUD which Project -based Section 8 properties are on HUD's "watch list" because of financial or physical problems. 4 {Although there is no formal "watch list" for RD properties, advocates can ask their state ConPlan agencies to ask the state4 RD office for a list of any "troubled 515 projects ".) Be sure those properties are included in the Annual updates of the ConPlan. -: Periodically check HUD's property disposition webpage (www.hud.eov /offices /hsg /mfh /pd /p fphst.cfm,) to detect trends in foreclosures of multifamily properties in your jurisdiction. => Even1hough the state ConPlan regs don't require it,.get your state to include information about the number of units assisted with other federal, state, or local funds. => Make sure. that all public housing projects are included. Make sure that their physical condition is accurately portrayed. Make sure that there is a meaningful and realistic statement of revitalization needs presented. How does this compare with the PHA Plan, Part 7 "Capital Improvement Needs"?* =. Highlight the public housing units considered for demolition, sale, or "conversion" to vouchers..Look for thisinformation.in the PHA Plan at Part 8, `'Demolition and Disposition' and Part 10 "Conversion of Public . Housing, "* "As this guide went to press, HUD issued a notice proposing to eliminate the template. Check AUHCs Reg Watch web page &ivw.nlihc.orv7reQwatch/) to learn whether or to what extend any changes were made => Does the Market Analysis present the supply of housing in a way that shows various cost ranges, especially for rental units? How much of that supply would be affordable to extremely low income people should they lose the federally- assisted housing`they are currently` living in? What is the vacancy rate of those units affordable to extremely-low income people is it really available to them? Are these units decent, safe, and sanitary? How many (and what percentage) of the LIHTC units are targeted to people with extremely low incomes (below 30% AMI)? => Where are the vacant, affordable units in relation to where people are currently living and working? -. If they lose their current, federally - assisted homes will they have access to basic services such as grocery stores, doctors, etc.? If they lose their current, federally - assisted homes will they have unduly long and expensive commutes to jobs? F1 Will there be added pressure on the affordable market -rate rents if public housing is demolished or sold, or if a private owner "prepays' a HUD- subsidized mortgage or''opt outs" of the Project -based Section 8 program and converts units to condos? Although tenants will get "tenant protections or "enhanced" vouchers which stay in the community even after..the, displaced tenant no longer needs the voucher,: if an assisted tenant moves, their former unit is no longer available to other low income residents in the. future. This means that` there is a net loss of affordable housing stock in the'community. The displaced public and assisted housing tenants with vouchers are then competing with other low income tenants for a limited supply of decent, affordable housing. Fair Housing Each year a jurisdiction must "certify" that it is "affirmatively furthering fair housing." This means that it: has an analysis of impediments ("Al") to fair housing choice; is taking appropriate actions to overcome the effects of impediments,• and keeps records. The Al is a separatedocument that is not required to `be apart, of the Annual Action Plan. Although HUD's official "Fair Housing Planning Guide" says an AI "must be completed/updated in accordance with.timeframes for the Consolidated Plan," HUD memos. (September 2, 2004, most recently) have relaxed this requirement and merely say that jurisdictions "should... update the AI annually where necessary." [24 cFR 91.225(a)(1)] and [24 cFR 91325(axl)j Preservation Opportunities and Fair Housing Is the loss of public or assisted housing an "impediment" to fair housing choice? => Will the: loss of public or assisted housing have a "disparate impact" on people of a particular race or ethnicity, or who are disabled or elderly? Is the Analysis of Impediments updated to take into consideration the impact of the demolition or conversion of public housing or the loss of assisted housing to market rate rents? Does the Al indicate what actions the jurisdiction will take to address this problem? G The Strategic Plan This "long-term" plan must be done at least every five years. The Strategic Plan has four overall requirements related to a jurisdiction's priorities for allocating funds to housing and community development activities. • The Strategic Plan must describe a jurisdiction's "general" priorities for distributing its CPD money geographically and among various "categories of need," which are broken down by "activity" :types (e.g., rental rehab) .and household/tenure types (e.g., extremely low income renters). In addition to a description, jurisdictions must complete Table 2A (see discussion box below), which is a useful snapshot for - advocates to review: • The Strategic Plan must-explain why a "category of need" is given allocation priority, particularly among extremely low, low, and moderate income households. • The Strategic Plan must present the jurisdiction's "specific objectives" intended to address priority needs, and describe how all f inds`will be used to address those needs. These should be listed on Table 2C. • The Strategic Plan must identify any obstacles to meeting underserved needs. [24 CFR 91.215(a)(I) -(4)] and [24 CFR 91.315(a)(1) -(4)] In addition to the above overall priority requirements, the Strategic Plan must also discuss priority needs relating to "affordable" housing, homelessness and special needs housing, and public housing. For affordable housing, the Strategic Plan must explain how funding allocation priorities are based on the characteristics of the housing market, the severity of housing problems and extent of needs of the various income categories, as well as the needs of renters compared to owners., A HUD Guideline adds clarity to the regulations,-. repeating language in HUD's explanation of the 2006 regulations changes (the "preamble "), by declaring that a jurisdiction should also be explicit about how CPD funds will be used for the various types of housing activities, such as rehabilitation of rental units or acquisition' of rental units. The regulations were changed in 2006 to reinstate as an affordable housing activity type (although only in parentheses and not on the tables) "preserving affordable housing units that may be lost from the assisted housing inventory for any reason." [24 CFR 91.215 ft1j] and [24 CFR 91.315(b)(1)] For homelessness, the Strategic Plan must describe a jurisdiction's strategy for: Helping people avoid becoming homeless. HUD's Guideline adds that a jurisdiction must also describe its strategy for helping extremely low and low income people who are at "imminent" risk of becoming homeless. • Reaching out to homeless people to determine their needs. • Addressing needs for emergency shelter and transitional housing. Helping homeless people make the transition to permanent housing. [24 CFR 91.215(d)(1)] and [24 CFR 91.315(d)] For public_ housing, the regulations regarding the Strategic Plan only require a jurisdiction to describe how it will address the needs of public housing. [24 CFR 91.215(c)] and 124 CFR 91.315(c)(2)] HUD Guidelines add that the Strategic Plan should have a summary_ of the public housing agency's (PHA) strategy to serve the needs of extremely low, low, and moderate income families. The PHA's strategy for addressing the revitalization needs of public. housing should also be summarized in the .Strategic Plan. The HUD Guidelines provide an optional Table 4, "Priority Public Housing Needs," on which the PHA should identify all priority public housing restoration and revitalization needs that it either currently has or will have in the upcoming years. The Guide stresses that the priority needs should. reflect the results of consultation with residents and the general ConPlan public participation process. HUD's 'Priorily `Housing Needs and Aedvity Tables 2A HUD has devised Table 2A, which forces jurisdictions to "indicate whether specific types; of needs are a priority: The first page" of Table-2A ( "Priority Housing Needs/Investment Plan Table ") requires jurisdictions to indicate whether specific categories of need are priorities. Those categories -of need are broken down . between renters and owners; and, for each there is a further breakdown based on income level (e.g. extremely low, low, and moderate). For renters there is yet another level of detail, household size. In each category, jurisdictions must present a numerical estimate of the :unmet need and. the number of ,units it intends to assist in the .future. The second page:of Table 2A ("Priority. Housing. Activities ") lists specific categories of need based on the type of activity, such as "rehabilitation of existing rental units" or "acquisition of existing rental units." There is no specific category of need called "preservation of rental units ;" however, preservation can be, represented by rehab or acquisition.. Here again, jurisdictions must indicate whether an activity type is a priority and indicate how many units it intends to . assist in the future. .:i Preservation Opportunities and the Strategic Plan . Work to make preserving affordable housing a "priority need" in the Strategic Plan; and, if your jurisdiction uses "relative" priorities such as "high," "medium;' or. "low" priority, convince the .decision - makers to designate preservation as a "high" priority. . => Work to make the preservation genuine by getting "specific objectives" related to preservation as a "priority need" in the Strategic Plan. -� Get "specific objectives" for public housing. Get "specific objectives" for assisted housing. -� Be sure the "specific objectives ". follow HUD's Guidelines by,expressing proposed accomplishments in numerical terms (for example: number of Section 8 units preserved that encountered contract "opt outs ;" the number of units saved as affordable to "low" income residents in "expiring" subsidized FHA- insured mortgage projects; or the number of units kept in the RD 515 program that could have been prepaid). Be sure that the preservation "specific objectives" and numerical goals are also. indicated on Transition Table 2C: => Be sure that the Strategic Plan describes how all funds that could reasonably be expected to be available (not just CPD dollars) will be used for each preservation "specific objective.': . Will the state set aside HOME and /or CDBG funds for preservation of RD Section 515 units? How will the jurisdiction help preservation by assisting all parties access: • Any State Housing Trust Fund? • The Affordable Housing Program of the Federal Home Loan Bank? • Low Income Housing Tax Credits? • USDA's Rural Development Section 515 loans? • HUD's Mark -to- Market mortgage restructuring program for expiring project -based Section 8 units? -� What will the jurisdiction do to help nonprofits acquire properties with expiring Project -based Section 8 contracts or "troubled" projects at foreclosure sales? -. Will the jurisdiction have an affirmative policy of exercising its "right of first refusal ". to purchase a troubled HUD -owned property? => Although there is no line on Table 2A or Table 2C for "preserving affordable housing," advocates can reinforce the narrative statement of "specific objectives" to address "priority needs" by getting the jurisdiction to give priority to "rehabilitation of existing rental units" and "acquisition of existing rental units." OJ => If you are not successful in winning recognition of preservation as a "priority need," be sure that the Strategic Plan explains why it is not considered a priority - this explanation might help with future advocacy efforts. => Be sure that the Strategic Plan complies with the regulations. by describing how the characteristics of the housing.market and the severity, of housing needs of extremely low, income renters provide the. reasoning behind the priorities and actual use of funds for "preserving affordable housing units that may be lost from the assisted housing inventory` for any reason." Be sure that the Strategic Plan summarizes the'PHAs plan for addressing the revitalization needs of public housing and for meeting the needs of extremely low income people if there is 'a plan to demolish public housing or convert it to market -rate housing. -> Convince the jurisdiction to include the optional Table 4, "Priority: Public Housing Needs:" • Do preservation activities get a "high' priority? • Do I the priorities reflect the consultation with residents and with the community comments from ConPlan's public participation process? • Does the PHXs planned use of Capital Funds maximize maintenance and improvements? (If the Co -an is silent, check out the PHA Plan, Part 7 "Capital Improvement Needs. ") ' If the PHA has plans for "mixed - income' housing, do those plans include one - for -one. replacement housing opportunities for extremely low income people? M] ! The Annual Action'Plan The Annual Action Plan must describe each activity a jurisdictions will carry out with CPD funds in the upcoming year to address the "priority needs" and "specific objectives" in the Strategic Plan. In addition to a description, a jurisdiction must complete Table 3C, which is very useful for advocates. [24 CFR 91.220(d)] Most states do not directly carryout CDBG activities;.instead, most states distribute CDBG to local governments .which in turn undertake specific activities. States must describe how they. will distribute funds to local governments and nonprofits, and there must be a description of all. criteria used to select applications . from localities. States must also describe how all CDBG money will be allocated among all funding categories (e.g., housing, economic . development, public _works, etc.). [24 CFR 91.320(d)] and [24 CFR 91.320(k)(I)(i)] Important required Action Plan elements, include: • A summary of all resources expected to be available, including all, federal (not just CPD dollars), state, local, and private resources. [24 CFR 91.220(c)] and [24 CFR 91.320(c)] • A description of the reasoning behind allocation priorities. [24 CFR 91220(d)] and [24 CFR 91.320(d)] • An estimate of the number and type of households that will benefit (does not apply to states). [24 CFR 91.220(d)] • The geographic areas that will get assistance and the reasons these areas have priority. [24 CFR 91.220(1)] and [24 CFR 91.320(f)] • For CDBG - assisted activities, there must be enough detail about each activity (including location) that people can determine the degree to which they are affected (does not apply to states). [24 CFR 91.220(l)(Ixiv)] • Actions to foster and maintain affordable housing. [24 CFR 91.220(k)] and [24 CFR 91.3200)] • An explanation of obstacles to meeting underserved needs, and actions to address them. [24 CFR 91220(k)] and [24 CFR 91.320G1 The Action Plan must also indicate activities a jurisdiction will undertake in the upcoming year to address affordable housing, homelessness, and public housing needs. Highlights include: One -year goals for the number of households to be provided affordable housing through rehabilitation, acquisition, new construction, or rental assistance activities. [24 CFR 91.220(8)] and [24 CFR 91.320(8)] Activities that will prevent homelessness, especially for those with incomes below 30% of the median. [24 CFR 91.220(1)] and [24 CFR 91.320(h)] Actions that will address the needs of public housing (does not.apply to states). [24 CFR 91.220(h)] 11 Preservation Opportunities and the Annual Action Plan => Be sure the Annual Action Plan describes the actions your jurisdiction will take to "maintain" affordable housing. Be sure the Action Plan summarizes all resources available to help preserve affordable housing. => Be sure that Table 3A contains "specific annual objectives" that reflect the Strategic Plan's "specific objectives" relating to preservation. Be sure specific annual objectives to be funded with CPD dollars are listed separately from those to -be `funded with other federal or non - federal funds. Be sure numerical accomplishments are proposed for'each preservation specific annual objective. Be sure the Annual Action Plan describes how the PHA and the jurisdiction Will use available resources to meet the ongoing needs of public housing residents by, maintaining and/or renovating projects. => If 'you are.working on the state ConPlan get the state to structure its CDBG and HOME' distribution practices to provide a set aside or extra points for projects designed to preserve affordable housing, 12 e' Five Stages of the ConPlan Process and Related Public Participation The ConPlan calendar has five stages. This section briefly describes the five stages and their related public participation requirements. Next, this section suggests preservation - related action opportunities at each stage. 1. Identify Needs The law requires a public hearing to get peoples' ideas on housing needs. HUD's regulations require this hearing to take place before a "proposed" ConPlan, or a draft, is published for comment. (See page 17 for more about other public participation requirements, and page 2 for more about the content of the ConPlan's "Housing Needs" component.) [24 CFR 91.105(c)] and [24 CFR 91.115(b)(3)] 2. Proposed ConPlan There,must be a notice in the newspaper that a draft, or "proposed," is available. Complete . copies of the proposed ConPlan must be in public places, such as libraries. A "reasonable number ".of copies of a proposed ConPlan must be provided for free. There must be at least one public hearing "during the development of the ConPlan" (does not apply to states). The public must have at least 30 days to review and comment on the proposed ConPlan.. [24 CFR 91.105(bx2) - (4)) and (24 CFR 91.115(b)(2) & (4)) 3. Final ConPlan The jurisdiction must "consider ".public comments about the proposed ConPlan, attach a summary of the comments to the final ConPlan, and explain in the final ConPlan why peoples.' suggestions were not used, if they were not. A copy of the final ConPlan-must be available to the public. [24 CFR 91.105(b)(5)] and [24 CFR 9].115 (b)(4) & (f)) 4. Amendments to the ConPlan The ConPlan must be amended if there are any changes in priorities, or in the purpose, location, "scope," or beneficiaries of an activity, or if money is used for an activity not mentioned in the Action Plan. If there is a "substantial amendment," then public participation requirements are triggered. HUD allows the jurisdiction to define "substantial amendment." At a minimum, however, the regulations for local governments say that a "substantial amendment" must include a change in the use of CDBG funds, and for states a change in the way a state allocates CDBG money to small towns and rural areas. [24 CFR 91.105(c)(1)], [24 CFR 91.101(c)(1)], and 24 CFR 91.505(a) & (b)] The public participation requirements for a "substantial amendment' include: giving "reasonable" notice that a "substantial amendment" is proposed; making the "substantial amendment" available to the public; and, providing 30 days for public review and comment. The jurisdiction must "consider" peoples' comments and attach a summary of them. [24 CFR 91.105(c)(2) & (3)] and [24 CFR 91.115(cx2) & (3)] 13 5. The Annual Performance Report In the Performance Report, a jurisdiction shows what it actually did to meet housing needs. The Performance Report must include a description of the money available and how it was spent, the location of projects, the number of families and individuals assisted, and the number of people assisted by income category, including those with income below 30 % of the area median income. (24 CFR 91.5201 The public participation requirements related to the Performance Report are similar to those for a "substantial amendment," but with only a 15 -day comment period. [24 CFR 91.105(4)] and (24 CFR 91.115(d)] The Annual Performance- Report contains a number of computer -based sets of records. Four of these are explicitly available to the public. For local jurisdictions, one is the Grantee Performance Report (GPR), also known as IDIS Report C04PR03; it applies only to CDBG, yet it provides extensive detailed information about each activity funded by CDBG. Advocates should be sure to get a copy of the GPR. Another report is called the CAPER (IDIS Report C04PR06), which is a general, aggregate picture of what the jurisdiction accomplished. For states; a Performance Evaluation Report is required which gives you basic information about each project funded with CDBG during the year. For HOME - assisted activities, the key IDIS report is C04PR22; "Status of HOME Activities" which lists�all HOME- assisted activities open and funded as well as closed out, by address, number of units, and dollar amounts committed and disbursed. As this guide goes to press, CPD is beginning to implement an additional layer of reporting called "Performance' Measurement System" which will include more information, including housing information such as how many units in a project are "affordable" and how many years they are required to be "affordable'. Chapter 4 of a Training Manual and Guide focuses on housing, www.hud.gov/offices/gpd/about/performance/traininp,/index.cfm,. 14 Preservation Opportunities During the Five ConPlan Stages Opportunities at the Needs Identification Stage The Needs Identification stage is the first opportunity to raise public awareness about the importance of preserving the existing stock. Advocates can take advantage of the public hearings to inform local elected officials, other policy makers, the media, and the community at large about the federal government's investment in affordable housing in previous years. Handouts and testimony can be prepared showing how much public and assisted housing there is and how important it is to residents. Highlight the limited supply of affordable market -rate housing in the community, and talk about its low vacancy rate and /or substandard quality. Impress upon officials the added pressure on. the affordable market -rate housing stock if federally - assisted units are lost. Residents can testify about the sense of community they have at their publi c housing or assisted housing developments, and what it would mean to lose that sense of community if their developments.are demolished. or converted to. . market -rate housing. Tenants can also remind policy makers of the lifeline this affordable housing provides their families. If projects are in jeopardy due to pressures to convert diem to market rate housing, or to some other use, underscore the hardship this will cause current and futre residents. If a project is "troubled" due to poor maintenance, demonstrate how rehabilitation is a more responsible husbanding of this earlier public investment, and how rehabilitation is a far more economical alternative than new construction. Opportunities at the Proposed ConPlan Stage Get a copy of the proposed ConPlan to check whether affordable housing preservation was given the: attention you requested. Just because preservation was stressed at the Needs Identification stage, that doesn't mean it was included or adequately addressed in the draft ConPlan. Although some discussion about preservation might have been added as a result of your advocacyefforts, check whether affordable housing preservation was deemed a "priority" need. (Some jurisdictions simply indicate whether a category of need is a "priority", while others indicate relative priority such as "high" priority or "medium" priority.) 15 Having affordable housing preservation recognized as a "priority" need is a good first step; however, it can be meaningless if no money will be allocated toward it. Be sure that the Annual Action Plan actually proposes to allocate an adequate amount of funds in the upcoming year for affordable housing preservation. Also, be sure that the Action Plan specifies the source(s) of the funds to be allocated, and then assess whether securing such funds in the indicated amounts is realistic. Study the details of programs proposed for preservation; are they designed to succeed? (See page 7 about priority setting in the Strategic Plan, and page 11 about allocating funds in the Annual Action. Plan.) Prepare comments about the draft ConPlan's approach to affordable housing preservation, and deliver these comments verbally at the hearing, as well as in writing. If the draft language is good, be sure to support it. Suggest improvements if necessary. If affordable housing preservation was ignored or inadequately addressed in the draft ConPlan, despite strong input at the Needs Identification stage, raise the issue again (and think of new allies to bring on board.or other decision- makers to inform and engage) . Opportunities at the Final ConPIan Stage . If the final ConPlan does not adequately address affordable housing preservation despite input at the previous stages, then the final ConPlan must contain an explanation. The jurisdictions rationale for ignoring or shortchanging . preservation might give advocates a handle for securing more support the next time around. Advocates do not have: to wait for "the next time around;' they can immediately work to convince elected. officials to amend the ConPlan. Opportunities at the Amendments Stage Advocates must be vigilant. just because preservation of affordable housing was given priority status, it is possible that changes adversely affecting preservation will be made by a jurisdiction sometime over the course of the year. To ensure that advocates are notified of major changes affecting preservation, convince the jurisdiction to include in its definition of "substantial amendment" any changes to affordable housing preservation activities that impact the priority, scope, or beneficiaries of preservation activities. Advocates can work with jurisdiction staff to craft a definition that allows for practical changes without requiring public notice and comment (see page 13), while protecting preservation programs from being harmed. 16 E Opportunities at the Annual Performance Report Stage Be sure that affordable housing preservation programs areri t just on paper in response to your earlier advocacy::. with little or no intent on the part of the jurisdiction to effectively carry them out. Ninety days after the close of the program -year; the Annual Performance Report should be available. Obtain a copy and assess the extent to which affordable housing preservation programs were carried out. If there has not been sufficient action or expenditure of funds, work with staff and elected officials to identify and eliminate technical problems, and /or engage in new advocacy efforts to remove political obstacles. Required Public Participation: Your Invitation to Be Involved There. are public. participation requirements in addition to those mentioned in earlier . paragraphs. describing the five stages of the ConPlan. Each jurisdiction must have a written "citizen participation plan" that must be available to the public. The citizen participation plan must "provide for" and "encourage" public involvement in coming up with the ConPlan, and in reviewing any "substantial amendment" as well as the Annual Performance Report. The jurisdiction must encourage involvement by low income people, especially in low income neighborhoods and areas where CDBG money might be spent. Jurisdictions are "expected to take whatever actions are appropriate to encourage involvement by minorities, people who do not speak English, and,disabled- people.". Local jurisdictions (not states) must also encourage involvement by public and assisted housing residents. [24 CFR 91.105(a)(2)] and [24 CFR 91.115(a)(2)] There must be "reasonable and timely". access to information and records relating to the, ConPlan, and people must. be able to review records from the last five years that are. related to the ConPlan. and any use of federal money covered by the ConPlan.. For local jurisdictions (not states) the public must have "reasonable and timely" access to local meetings (such as community advisory committee meetings, council meetings, etc.). [24 CFR 91.10 M - (h)] and [24 CFR 91.1150] Public hearings must be held after "adequate" notice to the public. "Publishing small print notices in the newspaper a few days before the hearing is not adequate notice," the regulations say, but "two weeks notice is adequate." HUD's Guidelines add that notice should be in nonlegal sections of newspapers, and in newspapers serving low income neighborhoods, minority populations, and non - English - speaking populations. Public Service Announcements over radio and television are encouraged by HUD, as are direct mailings and phone contacts to those who have requested it. [24 CFR 91.105(e)(2)] and [24 CFR 91.115(b)(3)(i)] Public hearings must be held at times and places convenient for low income people. HUD's Guidelines suggest holding hearings in the evening or on weekends, and in places at which low income people feel comfortable, especially in neighborhoods where most people who will benefit live. Where there area "significant" number of people who do not speak English, the citizen participation plan must show how they can be involved. The jurisdiction must give written, "meaningful," and "timely" responses to written public complaints (15 days is "timely" if the jurisdiction gets CDBG). [24 CFR 91.105(e)(3) &(4) and (j)] and [24 CFR 91.115(b)(3xii) &(iii) & (h)] 17 Preservation Opportunities in the Public Participation Process Thanks to the work of advocates in the 1980s, the CDBG law, which is the base for the ConPlan public participation requirements, has the best public involvement provisions of any federal program. Advocates should take advantage of every.opportunity built into the law and regulations to be actively engaged in the ConPlan process in order to ensure that the preservation of affordable housing is recognized in the ConPlan, given a high priority, and allocated sufficient funds. Is the jurisdiction taking "whatever actions are appropriate to encourage involvement by minorities,. people who do not speak English, and disabled people ?" => Is the jurisdiction encouraging involvement by residents of public housing? => Is the jurisdiction encouraging involvement by "residents of assisted housing? �. Are advocates doing what they can to help residents of public and assisted. housing articulate their needs to preserve their homes? What Advocates Can Do The .ConPlan is a potentially useful advocacy tool for directing funds toward activities that will help preserve affordable housing because jurisdictions must provide for and encourage, public participation, particularly by low income people. Advocates and residents should tie actively engaged in the needs assessment and priority setting processes, making sure that all of the needs are identified, including preservation, and that these needs get assignedthe level of priority they deserve. Through the Annual Action Plan public participation process, advocates and residents can strive to ensure that federal dollars are allocated to activities that will truly meet those high priority needs, including the preservation of affordable housing. 18 J Y P r iL For More Information • NLIHC's chapter on the ConPlan in the Advocate's Guide at www .nlihc.orJadvocates /index.htm. • HUD's Consolidated Plan web page is www.hud.g6v/offices LcSd/about/c=lan/index.cf-m. • HUD's "Guidelines for Preparing a Consolidated Plan: For Local Jurisdictions" is available .at; www.hud. jzov /offices /cl2d/ about /copplan/toolsandguidance /guidance / #focal. HUD's "Guidelines.for Preparing a Consolidated Plaw.For States" is.:available at www.hud gov /offices /cpd/ about /coWlan/toolsandguidance /guidance/ #states. o The regulations are available at www.access.gj2o.�6V/nara/cfr/waisidx'05/24cfr9l 05.html. However, this,GPO address needs to be updated'to incorporate some changes finalized` on February 9, 2006 which are available'at www.hud.gov/offices/cD&about/c2Lnplan/finahule.R of the date of this guide, the Code of Federal Regulations web site does not have the ConPlan regs on it either; perhaps by the time you are reading this it will be at www.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/efrassemble.cmi. A detailed guidebook about the ConPlan for advocates is available at Appendix: Notes About Multifamily Data Sources The National Housing Trust (NHT) website (www.nhtinc.org/data _ map.asp.) has the following data: • Project -based Section 8 projects, along with any FHA- insured mortgage maturity dates. • Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) projects. • Rural Development (RD) Section 515 projects, however there is no information about expiration dates. Direct HUD and RD sources are available; however, some have limited information and/or are not easily viewable and can only be downloaded at the national level in file formats such as Access, Excel, dbf, etc. The tables often have many.fields, and users have to isolate their jurisdiction's projects from all other projects aii &then further identify those projects,that expire in x years. => HUD's Multifamily Assistance, and Section 8 Contract Database www.hud.gov /offices /hsg /mfh /exp /nafhdiscl.cfrn can only be downloaded in its entirety. This yields two tables inside one Access database, one table for properties, and one table for contracts, HUD's Insured Multifamily Mortgage_ Data Base www.hud.gov /offices /hsg/coMp /ots /mfh /mf f47.cfrn. HUD's Maturing Subsidized Mortgages database, - www.hud.gov /offices /hsg /mfh /maturing subsidized mortgages.cf n. This is actually a webpage that has a PDF file of projects that expire before the year 2014. It was created in 2004 and does not seem to be updated. => HUD's Active Section 236 Projects data base www.hud. gov/ offices / hsg / mfh/ map /actloan /activesec236grW.cfxn. HUD's "PD&R" web site for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program www.huduser.org/datasets/lihtc.html#data. HUD's HOME Program "Open Activities Report" www.hud.gov/offices/od/affordablehousing/reports/open/. RD's Section 515 (although there is no indication of mortgage term or threat of prepayment) http: // rdmfhrentals .sc.egov.usda.gov /RDMFHRentals /select stateJsp 20 Marty Dickinson t From: Brum, Teresa [TBrum @SpokaneCity.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 6:18 PM To: Marty Dickinson Subject: FW: Strategy -of -the -Month Club: Workforce Housing Toolkit This is an interesting approach that we could consider —a "housing toolkit" of incentives. Teresa Regulatory Barriers Clearinghouse Strategy -of- the -Month Club October 2007 Over the past several years, skyrocketing housing prices have moved homeownership opportunities beyond the reach of many working American families. Communities that actively promote affordable housing often come up against a number of challenges, including "Not in My Backyard" (NIMBY) concerns, excessive development fees, and zoning code regulations, just to name a few. To lessen the effects of these barriers in and around the Orlando area, the Orange County Government in Central Florida designed a Workforce Housing Toolkit to help local jurisdictions in their search for affordable housing solutions. Because there's no "one- size -fits- all" solution to housing barriers, this toolkit includes a variety of approaches, such as mixed - income development, density bonuses, and infill development. For example, a community that once relied on an industrial economy may house several vacant or blighted industrial buildings. Orange County's Workforce Housing Toolkit provides information on adaptive reuse programs, and describes how this approach can be used to turn an obsolete, underutilized building into one with a more productive purpose by creating new housing opportunities. Additionally, the toolkit contains resources on communities that have successfully instituted an adaptive reuse program. The toolkit consists of a variety of regulatory reform strategies that can be located by searching alphabetically "or by using the following subcategories: o Housing Development; o Housing Preservation; o Density and Design; 10/1 8/2007 u rage L or Y. • Financial Tools and Resources; • Owner Housing; • Rental Housing; and • Special Needs Populations To view the resources in this toolkit, please visit http: / /www.huduser.org /rbc/ search /rbcdetails.asp ?DocId--1514. We hope this information proves useful to you in your efforts to grow your region's affordable housing stock. If you have regulatory reform strategies or resources that you'd like to share, send us an email at rbcsubmit @huduser.org, call us at 1- 800 - 245 -2691 (option 4), or visit our websiite at www.regbarriers.org. Feel free to forward this message to anyone who is working to bring down the regulatory barriers to affordable housing. -------------------------------------------------------- This message was forwarded to you by the Regulatory Barriers Clearinghouse.eList (rbc @huduser.org) because you had expressed an interest in affordable housing and regulatory reform. If you do not wish to receive these occasional messages, send an email from your account to rbc @huduser.org with the word "unsubscribe ":in the _- SUBJECT line. 10/18/2007 City of Spokane Financing Sources Community Development Department and Other Resources Multifamily Housing Programs This is an overview of some resources available to developers of affordable rental housing in Spokane. Each project is unique and assembling the financing can.be time- consuming and confusing. Some programs work together and others do not; you will have to discuss your project with people familiar I the programs to find out what will work best for your project. Many of the sources have "strings" attached to their funds, usually restrictions on rents and /or tenant incomes. Only the project sponsor can assess if the restrictions and requirements are worth the access to the.funds. You should directly contact the appropriate sources shown below for information, applications and program materials. AIDS Housing of Washington phone: 206 - 322 -9444; website: www.aidshousitig.org email: info@aidshousiiig:org This non -profit corporation specializes in the development of housing for people living with .._ HIV /AIDS. It provides technical assistance and partnership contacts to for- profit and non - profit developers and service providers. City of Spokane Community Development Department phone: 509 - 625 -6325; TTY: 509 - 625 -6694; website: www.spokanecitycd.org; email: cdinformation@spokanecity.org The Community Development Department administers federal funds allocated to the City of Spokane for community development and housing activities. The main federal programs are HOME and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG). A portion of the City's HOME allocation is used for loans for the acquisition, rehabilitation and new construction of rental housing for low- income households. Rent and income restrictions apply. Applications are accepted twice a year and are posted on the City's home page www.spokanecity.org when they are available. Funds can only be used on properties within the Spokane City limits. A portion of the City's CDBG funds is allocated to eligible neighborhoods. One of these, the Downtown Neighborhood, sometimes designates a portion of its funds for the rehabilitation of rental properties in the Downtown area. The Rental Improvement Pilot Program (RIP) makes loans to for - profit owners of rental properties with 1 to 4 units for health, safety, and major systems repairs. The maximum loan is $10,000 /unit, up to $40,000 /fourplex, with a 10 -year term. Tenant income restrictions apply. Contact Kiemle and Hagood at 509 - 755 -7555 or shannonm @khco.com. The Lead Safe Spokane. program provides grants and forgivable loans for lead -based paint testing as well as repair or replacement of lead- tainted building components. Owner and renter- occupied family housing units are eligible. Income restrictions apply. Contact Kiemle and Hagood at 509 -755- 7555 or shannonm @khco.com. City of Spokane Developer Incentives Office Susanne Croft - phone: 509 - 625 -6967; email: scroft@spokanecity.org The Multiple Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Program is available to eligible property owners who construct new multifamily housing or rehabilitate existing vacant and underutilized buildings for multifamily housing in targeted urban centers of the City. The incentive applies to construction or rehabilitation of four or more multifamily dwelling units and exempts "ad valorem" property taxes for ten years on the improvements that create additional housing units. (SMC 8.15 and RCW 84.14) July 2006 City of Spokane Downtown Public Library phone: 509 -444 -5336; website: www.spokanelibrary.org The library has information on many aspects of project development. In addition to the usual resources, the Downtown branch has a Funding Information Center and is a Selective Government Depository Library. The Funding Information Center has information on government agencies and programs, philanthropic organizations, corporate and private foundations, grants, proposal writing, fundraising techniques, organizing non - profits, and related topics. As a Selective Government Depository Library, the Downtown Public Library receives a number of government publications. It does not receive all publications, hence the "selective" designation. Other Selective Government Depository Libraries include the libraries at Gonzaga University and Eastern Washington University. City /County Historic Preservation Office I Teresa Brum - phone: 509 - 625 -6983; email: tbrum ®spokanecity.org; website: www.historicspokane.org Tax credits are available for projects meeting certain criteria regarding the historic significance of the property and the work to be completed. There are federal tax credits that can be used to offset federal income taxes. These can be sold to investors to raise capital. Another program enables owners to reduce their tax assessments by the. amount of qualified rehabilitation for 10 years. County of Spokane Housing and Community Development Department phone: 509477 -2521; website: www .spokanecounty.org /communitydev Spokane County receives federal funds for housing and community development activities'in the County. While it may fund projects located within the Spokane City limits, the County will generally not use federal funds in projects that are eligible for funds under the City's housing programs. The County also administers funds collected pursuant to SHB2060, which are designated for affordable housing projects throughout the County. Additional information is available on its website. Federal Grant Information Federal Citizen Information Center phone: 1- 800- FED -INFO; website: www.pueblo.gsa.gov The federal government is a resource for information and funding. This centralized website includes information on a number of programs and resources. .- .For information on federal loans, grants and assistance, go directly to www.pueblo.gsa.gov /call /Ioans.htm or call 1- 888- 8PUEBLO (1- 888 -878- 3256). Grants.gov website: www.grants.gov This government website has information on over 900 grant programs in 26 Federal agencies. Murray's Grant Gateway website: http: / /murray.senate.gov /grants /index.cfm To help constituents with grants, Senator Murray's website walks them through the grant process. Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) phone: 206-340-8743,800-973-6223; website: www.flilbsea.com Member banks of the Federal Home Loan Bank have access to low cost funds through the FHLB, which they can invest in affordable housing loans. Due to the funding source, the bank can lend at an interest rate that may be below the market rate. FHLB has loan and grant programs. Information and applications can be obtained from the FHLB and its website, or from a member bank. July 2006 2 Inland Empire Rental Association (IERA) phone: 509 - 535 -1018; email: iera@iera.org; website: www.iera.org - IERA is a local. nonprofit membership organization organized to benefit and support owners, operators and suppliers of residential rental property. Member services include newsletters, dinners, educational classes, forms, books, mentoring program; legal plan and legislative updates. Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) phone: 800 - 336 -0679 (Seattle office); website: www.liscnet.org /resources (LISC Online Resource Library) or contact Impact Capital (Washington State LISC affiliate) phone: 509456 -8088; website: www.impactcapital.org LISC is a national organization that works with resident -led, community -based development organizations. It provides capital, technical expertise, training and information. LISC's Online. Resource Library offers "best practices" and "lessons learned ", industry tools, and web links for community development practitioners. Impact Capital supports the efforts of nonprofit organizations creating affordable housing for low- income people in Washington State. (See "Additional Information for Non - profits ".) Northwest Fair Housing Alliance (NWFHA) phone: 509 - 325 -2665 or 1- 800 - 200 -FAIR (3247); email: mirna ®nwfairhouse.org; website: nwfairhouse.org NWFHA provides advice to both consumers and housing providers regarding federal and state -Fair Housing laws. It specializes in education, counseling and.enforcement to end housing discrimination. Spokane Neighborhood Action Programs (SNAP) Kristi Sherlock - phone: 509-744-3370; email: sherlock ®snapwa.org website: www.snapwa.org SNAP has a number of programs serving low - income individuals and families. Under its weatherization program, SNAP provides partial financing of weatherization work (heating systems, insulation, doors and windows, etc.) on rental properties (single or multifamily dwellings) that are occupied by low- income households. Program funds come from federal, state, and local sources. The amount allocated to a project depends upon the work to be done and available program funding. A separate program is available for non - profits. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Spokane Field Office Director - Arlene L. Patton; email: arlene_patton ®hud.gov; phone: 509 - 368 -3200; national website: www.hud.gov HUD, a federal agency, provides funding for development of affordable housing, rental assistance, homeownership opportunities, homeless. assistance, economic and community development activities and fighting for Fair Housing. It partners with State and local governments, housing authorities, lenders, realtors, developers, non - profits, tribes, and faith-based organizations. Program information is available on the national website. HUD forms and handbooks can be ordered by calling 800 -767- 7468. HUD homes for sale are listed on the national website. Information on compliance with lead - based paint regulations . is available from the National Lead Information. Center at 800-424-LEAD. Discrimination complaints can be filed online or by calling 800 - 669 -9777. HUD fraud complaints can be reported at 800 -347 -3735. Information on government grants is available at www.hud.gov /grants and www.grants.gov. Washington Community Reinvestment Association (WCRA) phone: 800- 788 -6508 or 206 -292 -2922; email: info ®wcra.net; website: www.wcra.net WCRA underwrites and loans to both for - profit and nonprofit developers through its member financial institutions on properties throughout the State of Washington. WCRA can provide July 2006 3 permanent loans and loans with rehabilitation on affordable housing as well as bond and economic development financing. WCRA can assist in obtaining construction loans, tax credit investors and Federal Home Loan Bank financing. Technical assistance is available. Rents are restricted during the life of the loan. Washington State Attorney General's Office (AGO) phone: 800 - 551 -4636 (statewide) or 509 -456 -3123 (local); TDD: 800- 276-9883; website: www.atg.wa.gov /consumer The Consumer Protection Division of the AGO provides information and . informal mediation or disputes to consumers and businesses. General information on the State's Residential Landlord Tenant Act (RCW 59.18) is available at www.atg.wa.gov /consumer /It. Washington State Housing Finance Commission (WSHFCJ phone: 1- 800 - 767 -HOME or 206 -464 -7139; email: askus@wshfc.org; website: www.wshfc.org The Housing Finance Commission was created to provide below- market financing to buy, build, or preserve affordable housing and nonprofit capital facilities projects. It administers the state's allocation of federal low- income housing tax credits and has capital financing programs (taxable and tax - exempt bonds) and home ownership programs. To learn more about the Commission's homeownership, down - payment assistance, and first -time homebuyers programs visit the website at www.wshfc.org /buyers /index.htm. Low Income Housing Tax Credits ( LIHTC) are allocated to states, which allocate them to projects. The credits can be sold to investors to raise equity. It is a complicated process and requires careful attention to both federal and state requirements. Both rents and eligible tenant incomes are restricted. The WSHFC allocates LIHTC annually through a competitive process. LIHTC are available to for - profit and non -profit project sponsors. More information is available at the program website: www.wsh,.fc.org/tax-credits. The WSHFC issues bonds for housing for elderly, low - income, and special needs populations. Restrictions vary depending on the type of property financed. Nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations qualify for below- market financing for housing, facilities, or equipment that meets their.mission under the IRS determination letter. All bond programs are debt and require the ability to service that debt. More information is available at the program website: www.wshfc.org /bonds. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR NON - PROFITS Some organizations specialize in providing assistance to non - profit sponsors of affordable housing. To receive their assistance, the IRS must usually recognize the non- profit organization as a 501(c)(3) corporation. Under certain conditions, a non - profit housing developer may meet the criteria to: be designated as a HOME program Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO). CHDOs are eligible for program set - asides. Some of the organizations shown below have information and guidance on their websites that might also be useful to for - profit developers. Resources available to nonprofits that develop affordable housing include: Common Ground Spokane office - phone: Marj Dahlstrom - phone: 509 - 326 -3678 x23; fax: 509 - 326 -3832 email: mar d ®commongroundwa.org, website: www.commongroundwa.org Common Ground is a nonprofit consulting firm specializing in low- income and special needs housing development. It offers a range of services to non - profits and community -based organizations, church - affiliated groups, housing authorities, and local governments. July 2006 4 Community Frameworks (CF) Spokane office - phone: 509 -484 -6733; email: nrfadmin @communityframeworks.org; website: www.communityframeworks.org CF is a regional non - profit organization that specializes in assisting communities, organizations, groups, and individuals in the areas of affordable housing development, 'preservation and management, sweat - equity homeownership opportunities, farm labor housing, and family and childcare resources. 1! - ESD 1011Spokane Service Team Mandy Edwards -phone: 509 -535 -2156; email: medwards@esd101.net This is the local AmeriCorps service program, operated by Educational School District 101. It can work with non - profits and governmental bodies in the construction, remodeling, and rehabilitation of properties. Work is on a fee -for- service basis. Impact Capital Spokane - Terri Symbol - phone: 509 -456 -8088 or 1- 800 - 257 -7345 (in Eastern Washington); email: ter- ri@impactcapital.org; or Tracy Reich phone: 509- 624 =5936; or 1- 800 - 709 =8088 email: tracy@impactcapital.org; website: www.impacfcapital.org Impact Capital is a Washington nonprofit that works in conjunction with Local Initiative Support Coalition. It provides loans, technical assistance giants, and training to non- profits, tribes; and housing authorities which develop affordable housing and community - based economic development projects. Information and applications are available from the staff and the website: Northwest Nonprofit Resources (NNR) Sandy Gill - phone: 509 - 325 -4303; email: sgill@nnr.org NNR provides. management assistance and leadership development services for nonprofit organizations including affordable housing developers: ' It assists organizations and communities with community outreach and provides training and strategy sessions for nonprofit boards and staff: Spokane Low Income Housing Consortium (SLIHC) -, Cindy Algeo -phone: 509 - 325 -3235; email: slihe @omnicast.net " SLIHC is a consortium-of local non - profit providers of affordable - housing that promotes the long -term availability and maximum use of safe housing for people of low income in the Greater Spokane area. Member benefits include training, technical information, legislative updates, and a resource library. Washington State Department of Community Trade and Economic Development (CTED) phone: 360 - 725 -2908 website: www.cted.wa.gov CTED administers the Housing Trust Fund, the HOME program, funds collected under SHB2060, and other housing programs. Most programs are available to non - profits only, and are usually structured as low interest,' long -term" loans or grants. Long -term affordability , covenants are placed on the property. Applications and other information are posted on the website. Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC), Community Tustice Center. phone: 509 - 363 -2720 Community Service work crews comprised of offenders sentenced to community service hours to perform manual labor on construction and maintenance projects. All work is performed under DOC supervision. This service is available only to nonprofits and government agencies. July 2006 5 Washington State Department of Corrections, Division of Correctional Industries Airway Heights - Ron Hawley - phone: 509 -244 -6731 or Customer Service - 800 - 6284738; website: www.washingtonci.com State agencies, non - profits, and for - profits under contract with a public entity may purchase a variety of items made by offender workers including beds, single bed mattresses, bed and bath linens, tables, chairs, and office and dormitory furniture. Some food products are also available. Washington State Department of Revenue Spokane - Vickie Glover - phone: 509 -482 -3800 Non - profits that provide significant social services to their low- income tenants and those with funding . from the State's Office of Community Development may be eligible for an exemption of local real estate taxes. INDEX Bonds - see Washington State Housing Finance Commission CDBG (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Community Development Block Grants) - see City of Spokane, County of Spokane, Washington State Office of Community Development Fair Housing - see Northwest Fair Housing Alliance. and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development . HOME (U.S. Department of -Housing and Urban Development's HOME Investment Partnerships Program) - see City of Spokane, County of Spokane, Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development Housing Trust Fund - see Washington State Office of Community Development Landlord - Tenant Law see Washington State Attorney General's Office Lead -based paint - see City of Spokane Community Development Dept and U.S.. Department of Housing and Urban Development SHB 2060 Funds - see County of Spokane Tax credits - Low Income Housing Tax Credits - see Washington State Housing Finance Commission Tax credits - Historic Tax Credits - see Historic Preservation Office Tax exemptions - real estate - see City of Spokane Developer Incentives Office, City/County Historic Preservation Office, and Washington State Department of Revenue Weatherization - see Spokane Neighborhood Action Programs We are pledged to the letter and spirit of U.S. policy for the achievement of equal housing opportunity throughout the Nation. , We encourage and support an affirmative advertising and marketing program in which there are no barriers to obtaining housing because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. [DUAL MOUSING OPPORTUNITY July 2006 6 as DOWNTOWN SPOKANE PARTNERSHIP DOWNTOWN SPOKANE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT t D OWNTOWN S P O K A N E MEMORANDUM TO: Susan Ashe, Director of Legislative & Public Affairs City of Spokane FROM: Marty Dickinson, President Jeff Nave, Chair John Bennett, Public Policy Committee Chair Downtown Spokane Partnership RE: State Housing Committee Meeting August 3, 2007 - Seattle DOWNTOWN SPOKANE VENTURES DATE: July 25, 2007 You requested the Downtown Spokane Partnership (`DSP ") to provide input on whether "condominium conversions" (i.e. conversions of apartment buildings into residential condominiums) are having a material adverse affect on the availability of affordable rental housing units in Spokane's downtown core and adjacent neighborhoods. 'We uiderstand that the Association of Washington Cities has solicited the City of Spokane's testimony on this issue. The DSP has obtained a survey undertaken by the appraisal firm of Auble, Jolicoeur & Gentry of- all condominium in Spokane County that have been converted from apartment buildings over the years. The survey reflects that 667 apartment units have been converted to condominium units on a countti= -wide basis. Of those wets, 233 are located on the Lower South Hill, 227 are located in North Spokane, 164 are located in Browne's Addition, and 43 are located outside the City limits. Tlie survey also estimates that 273 apartment units will be converted to condominium units during 2007, 224 of which are located inn Big Trout Lodge (an upscale apartment community in Liberty Lake), 24 of which are located on the Lower South Hill, 14 of which are located on the Upper South Hill, and 11 of which are located in Brown's Addition. The DSP is not aware of any apartment buildinngs in the Cities downtown core that are being converted to condominiums. Runny of the recent condominium projects inn domitown Spokane have involved the rehabilitation of vacant (or under - utilized) warehouses and other commercial buildings. The recent tenant displacements at The Otis, The New A ladison, and The Commercial Building result from the renovation of properties to provide mixed - income rental housing or, inn the case of The Commercial, to provide for new commercial uses. We are aware the City of Seattle and other Puget Sound area communities have suffered a loss of affordable rental housing units in their downtown cores as a result of condominium conversions in the last few years. We suspect these conversions may result, in part; from market factors—e.g. longer commutes, greater average per capita personal wealth, and the scarcity of undeveloped land within urban F 509.456.0580 F 509.747.3127 211 N. WALL ST. STE. 300 SPOKANE WASHINGTON 99201 downtown. spokane.net Page 2 July 31, 2007 growth bou ndaries —that are not experienced in Spokane at the current time. We also suspect that many of the condominium conversions in the Spokane area were the result of a relatively soft rental housing market during the period that home loans were relatively easy to obtain. The DSP co-sponsored the Downtown Spokane Housing Study with the City and Fannie Mae. The DSP favors a downtown neighborhood in which rental and home ownership opportunities are available to persons of all income levels. Until such time as proposed legislation (if any) is drafted, the DSP is not in a position to provide comments on whether legislation in this area is warranted. However, as the City works with AWC and other cities to evaluate the desirability of such legislation, we suggest that the City seriously consider whether the stated goals of any such legislation (e.g. the promotion of affordable rental housing for persons of low income) are narrowly tailored to address problems that actually are being encountered in Spokane (or are reasonably anticipated to occur in Spokane in the foreseeable future). In this regard, it may be appropriate (if the facts so warrant) to treat fully�developed downtowns like Seattle and Bellevue differently the developing downtowns such as Spokane's. The DSP also applauds the City's efforts in convening the Mayor's Affordable Housing Taskforce. We assume the Taskforce will have some opportunity to review Spokane's needs and recommend appropriate policy based upon facts surrounding Spokane's housing concerns. c: Mayor Dennis Hession John Pilcher HB 2014 -S - DIGEST (DIGEST OF PROPOSED 1ST SUBSTITUTE) Provides that a notice of condominium conversion expressly states whether there is a county or city relocation assistance program for tenants or subtenants of conversion condominiums in the jurisdiction in which the property is located. Provides that, if the county or city does have a relocation assistance program, the following must also be included in the notice: (1.) A summary - of the terms and conditions under which relocation assistance is paid; and (2) Contact information'for the city or-county relocation assistance program, which must include, at a minimum, a telephone number of the city or. county department that administers the relocation assistance program for conversion condominiums. Provides that, at the decl:arant's option, the declarant may provide all tenants in a single building with an option to terminate their lease or rental agreements without cause or consequence after providing the declarant with thirty days' notice. In such case., tenants continue to have access to relocation assistance under this act. Requires a declarant to. pay relocation assistance in an amount to be determined by the city or county, which may not =y exceed a sum equal to t ree mont s of the tenan s or subtenant's rent at the time the conversion notic ee rr quired under this act is received. Provides that a declarant and any dealer shall not begin any constrLCt�nn, remodel ni g, or repairs to any ine portion of an occupied building that is to be converted to a condominium during the one hundred twenty -day no ice period D provided for in this act unless all res� detial tenants and residential su_b_tenants w o have e ec e no purchase a unit �v and who are in lawful occupancy in he building have-vacated the pr m; es. Provides that all cities and counties planning under RCW 36.70A.040, which have allowed any conversion condominiums within the jurisdiction within the previous twelve -month period, must include the following performance measure - related data in an annual report to the department of community, trade, and economic development: (1) The total number of apartment units converted into condominiums; (2) The total number of conversion condominium projects; (3)(a) The difference in the monthly rental housing cost of each former rental unit that is converted and (b) the monthly mortgage cost of the owner occupancy condominium to which it is converted or the expected monthly mortgage cost of the condominium to which it is in the process of being converted; (4) The total number of apartment tenants affected by the conversion who elect to purchase 'a condominium within the development and income information for each of those tenants; (5) The total number of apartment tenants who. receive relocation assistance,:the total amount of that assistance per. tenant,-and income information for all tenants who received relocation assistance; (6) Income information for all tenants in units that were converted into condominiums; and (7) The net change in the total number of rental housing units within the j.urisdiction:and. the net change..in the number of rental housing units affordable to law and very -low income households. Takes effect August 1, 2007. Does not apply to any..conversion condominiums for which a notice required under RCW 64.34.440 (1) has been delivered before the effective date of this act:. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .15 16 17 18 H- 2568.1 SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 2014 State of Washington 60th Legislature 2007 Regular Session By House Committee on Housing (originally sponsored by Representatives Chase, Santos, Kenney, Hasegawa, Miloscia, Simpson and Ormsby) READ FIRST TIME 02/28/07. AN ACT Relating. to the regulation of conversion condominiums; amending RCW 64.34.440 and 82.02.020; adding a new section`to chapter 64.34 RCW creating a new section; and providing an effective date. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: Sec. 1. RCW 64.34.440 and 1992 c 220 s 25 are each amended to read. as follows: (1)(a) A declarant of a conversion condominium, and any dealer who intends to offer units in such.a condominium, shall give each of the residential tenants and any residential subtenant in possession of a portion of a conversion condominium notice of the conversion and provide those persons with the public offering statement no later than ((may)) one hundred twenty. days before the tenants and any subtenant in possession are required-to vacate. The notice must_ i Set forth generally the rights of tenants and subtenants under this section ( (and shall.)); (ii) Be delivered pursuant to notice requirements set forth in RCW 59.12.040; and (iii) Expressly state whether there is a county or city relocation assistance program for tenants or subtenants of conversion condominiums P. 1 SHB 2014 1 in the jurisdiction in which the property is located. If the county or 2 city does have a relocation assistance program, the following must also 3 be included in the notice: 4 (A) A summary of the terms and conditions under which relocation 5 assistance is paid; and 6 (B) Contact information for the city or county relocation 7 assistance program, which must include, at a minimum, a telephone 8 number of the city or county department that administers the relocation 9 assistance program for conversion condominiums. 10 (b) No tenant or subtenant may be required to vacate upon less than 11 ((ninety)) one hundred twenty days' notice, except by reason of 12 nonpayment of rent, waste, conduct that disturbs other tenants' 13 peaceful enjoyment of the premises, or act of unlawful detainer as 14 defined in RCW 59.12.030, and the terms of the tenancy may not be 15 altered during that period except as provided in (c) of this 16 subsection. 17 (c) At the declarant's option, the declarant may provide all 18 tenants in a single building with an option to terminate their lease or 19 rental agreements without cause or .consequence after providing the 20 declarant with thirty days' notice. In such case, tenants continue to 21 have access to relocation assistance under ,subsection. (6)'(e) of this 22 section. 23 (dam Nothing in this subsection shall be deemed to waive or repeal 24 RCW 59.18.200(2). Failure to give notice as required by this section 25 is a defense to an action for possession. 26 (2) For sixty days after delivery or mailing of the notice 27 described in subsection (1) of this section, the person required to 28 give the notice shall offer to convey each unit or proposed unit 29 occupied for residential use to the tenant who leases that unit. If a 30 tenant fails to purchase the unit during that sixty -day period, the 31 offeror may offer to dispose of an interest in that unit during the 32 following one hundred eighty days at a price or on terms more favorable 33 to the offeree than the price or terms offered to the tenant only if: 34 (a) Such offeror, by written notice mailed to the tenant's last known 35 address, offers to sell an interest in that unit at the more favorable 36 price and terms, and (b) Such tenant fails to accept such offer in 37 writing within ten days following the mailing of the .offer to the 38 tenant. This subsection does not apply to any unit in a conversion LL � SHB 2014 p. 4. condominium if that unit will be restricted exclusively to nonresidential use or the boundaries of the converted unit do not substantially conform to the dimensions of the residential unit before conversion. (3) If a seller, in violation of subsection (2) of this section, conveys a unit to a purchaser for value who has no knowledge of the violation, recording of the deed conveying the unit extinguishes any right a tenant may have to purchase that unit but does not affect the right of a tenant.to recover damages from.the seller for a violation of subsection (2) of this section. (4) If a notice of conversion specifies a date by which a unit or proposed unit must be vacated and otherwise complies with the provisions of this chapter and chapter 59.18-RCW, the notice also constitutes a notice to vacate specified by that statute. (5) Nothing in this` section permits termination of a lease by a declarant in violation of its terms. (6) Notwithstanding RCW 64.34.050(1), a city or county may by appropriate ordinance require with respect to any conversion condominium within the jurisdiction of such city or county that: (a) In addition to the statement required by RCW 64..34.415(1)(a), the public offering statement shall contain a copy of the written inspection report prepared by the appropriate department of such city or county, which report shall list.any violations of the housing code or other governmental regulation, which code or regulation is applicable regardless of whether the real property is owned as a condominium or in some other form of ownership; said inspection shall be made within forty -five days of the declarant's written request therefor and said report shall be issued within fourteen days of said inspection being made_ Such inspection may not be required with respect to any building for which a final certificate of occupancy has been issued by the city or county within the preceding twenty -four months; and any fee imposed for the making of such inspection may not exceed the fee that would be imposed for the making of such an inspection for a purpose other than complying with this subsection (6)(a); (b) Prior to the conveyance of any residential unit within a conversion condominium, other than a conveyance to a declarant or affiliate of a declarant: (i) All violations disclosed in the p. 3 SHB 2014 1 inspection report provided for in (a) of this subsection, and not 2 otherwise waived by such city or county, shall be repaired, and (ii) a 3 certification shall.be obtained from such city or county that such 4 repairs have been made, which certification shall be based on a 5 reinspection to be made within seven days of the declarant's written 6 request therefor -and which certification shall be issued within seven 7 days of said reinspection being made; 8 .(c) The repairs required to be made under (b) of this subsection 9 shall be warranted by the declarant against defects due to workmanship 10 or materials for a period of one year following the completion of such 11 repairs; 12 (d) Prior to. the. conveyance of any residential unit within„ a 13 conversion condominium, other than a conveyance. to a declarant or 14 affiliate of a declarant: M The declarant shall establish and 15 maintain, during the. one -year warranty period provided .under (c) of 16 this subsections an account containing, a sum equal to ten percent of 17 the actual cost of making the repairs . required under (o) of this 18 subsection; (ii) during the one -year warranty period, the funds in such 19 account shall be used.ehcluaively for paying the actual cost of making 20 repairs regtlired, or for otherwise :Cat;s.fyinq claims made, under such 2i warranty; (ii-L) following the expiratlon of the one -year warranty 2 2 peri cad, anv funds rPma i ni nc; in such account- sha ! i be i mmed1.atP ! v 23 disbursed to the declarant; algid (iv) the declarant .shall notify in .!'1 wri ti na the a ssncl at.l nn and SlIC;h nl tv nr 701ti -t iT as to the i ncat l nn of- 2 such account anu any disbursements 26 (e) A declarant shall pay relocation assistance ( (ftte —exeeed hundred 27 five 7., ll -a-rs -- per- be paid) , in an amount to be 28 determined by the city or county, which may not exceed a sum equal to 29 three months of the tenant's or subtenant's rent at the time the 30 conversion notice required under subsection (1) of this section is 31 received, to tenants and subtenants: 32 i Who elect not to purchase a unit 33 ii. Who are in lawful occupancy .for residential purposes of a 34 unit; and 35 (iii) Whose monthly household income from all sources, on the date 36 of the notice described in subsection (1) of this section, was less 37 than an amount equal to eiqhty percent of (({i-)-)) SHB 2014 D. 4 t 3 (A) The monthly median income for comparably sized households in 2 the standard metropolitan statistical area, as defined and established - 3 by the United States department of housing and urban development, in 4 which the condominium is located(( -))L or ((- (ii))) 5 B If the condominium is not within a standard metropolitan 6 statistical area, the monthly median income for comparably sized 7 households in the state of Washington, as defined and determined by 8 said department. 9 The household size of a unit shall be based on the number of 10 persons actually in lawful occupancy of the unit. The tenant or 11 subtenant actually in lawful occupancy of the unit shall be entitled to 12 the relocation assistance. Relocation assistance shall be paid on or 13 before the date the tenant or subtenant vacates and shall be in 14 addition to any damage deposit or other compensation or refund to which 15 the tenant is otherwise entitled. Unpaid rent or other amounts owed by 16 the tenant or subtenant to the landlord may be offset against the 17 relocation assistance; 18 (f) Except as authorized under (g) of this subsection, a declarant .19 and any dealer shall not begin any construction, remodeling, or repairs 20 to any interior portion of an occupied building that is to be converted Y X11 to a condominium during the one hundred twenty -day notice period 22 provided for in subsection (1) of this section unless all residential 23 tenants and residential subtenants who have elected not to purchase a 24 unit and who are in lawful occupancy in the building have vacated the 25 premises For the purposes of this subsection: 26 (i) "Construction, remodeling, or repairs" means the work that is 27 done for the purpose of converting the condominium, not work that is 28 done to maintain the building or lot for the residential use of the 29 existing tenants: or subtenants; 30 (ii) "Occupied building" means a stand -alone structure occupied by 31 tenants and does not include other stand -alone buildings located on the 32 property or detached common area facilities; and 33 (g)(i) A declarant and any dealer may begin construction 34 remodeling, or repairs to interior portions of an occupied building 35 under the following.circumstances: 36 (A) To repair or remodel vacant units to be used as model units, if 37 the repair or remodel is limited to one model for each unit type in the 38 building; p. 5 SHB 2014 1 {B) To repair or remodel a vacant unit or common area for use as a 2 sales office; and 3 (C) The declarant or dealer has offered existing tenants an option 4 to terminate an existing lease or rental agreement without cause or 5 consequence under subsection (1)(c) of this section. 6 (ii), The- work performed under this subsection (6)(g) must not 7 violate the tenant's or subtenant's rights of quiet enjoyment during 8 the one hundred twenty -day notice period. 9 (7) Violations of any city or county ordinance adopted as 10 authorized by subsection (6) of this .section shall give _rise to such 11 remedies, penalties, and causes of action vrhich may be lawfully imposed 12 by such city or county. Such violations shall not invalidate. the 13 creation of the condominium or the convevance of anv interest therein. 14 Sec, 2. RCW 82.02.020 and 2006 c 149 s 3 are each amended to read as fn l l ows'- A 16 Except only as expre-s ,1y Y_Gvidea in cnapters 67, 20 and i Y i\Cvr, ±7 the state preempts the field of imposing taxes upon retail sales of Q L. /�.. ,.- {- .. +- i, .. ri- i . . 10 tangible personal propeiLV, --e use of tangs le personal prv�',ser�v, 19 parimutuel wagering authorI pursuant to RC 6/ .16.QbQ,.cgnvevances, 20 and cigarettes, --nd: no coun-'Cv. town, or other municipal subdivislon -1 shall have the riuht to imrose taxes of thl at nar- t'_re. Except as 22 provided -in RCIN 64.34.440 and 82.02.050 through 82.02.090, no county, c.3 a. C Da corpora-c- shall impose any tax, tee. u Or ^arrTe- either ri --e,^- Gr in,- I_reCtr On the constr Ci10Zi ' � O luen_ reCGi e b ?i1a ulCli cGICinerclal bu11a, 1nCT5 i nrr{.,'..Stri a_ b, .1. I r,i nrTS r nn ancT Sher .h i rdi n o b, 7.1 i di nr, cna.ca ^r ;' 7 c�UUiIi 4iian \;c: i_ifc -i -f_C�, Cir C; Ft l_ie Cleve'LOD rc: -;•^e e1 k- J,11 'v1S3on n f n'ZQ _-a1 _ t f rl•�, Pf- ":.rncja: tFii c covti �... does preclude ded -Ca of _ and or easements wi t - i1n he proposed yU jeve 1 n�ment or at h.Icr) th.e rount�,�, . `'J-. ,', tC::ln, or ,tj er muni rir,a Ji CoruoraLZvit Can uciuva.Strate are rcaSOncas::iiv nEie:.aSa,l_ji CL a ii %eL , .3.eauiL i Ot t ha nrn ncr?r{ Ce _ra F n m?n t. or r� t a.t n rTh _�h thr-- ;-saris r•ati nn n} (anrl . r r a. J e'litCii l.. i3 'l,..G ap plYi V:u 'i'tii ._v_.`_.i_.vsn ?n111nt- =zr Ar!r n1Gn_- . t- k-I W r iii;f:ai i. -.1 - .yVft.i il_Ci t^1vYi� 41im i^ iii -t,s "v: p. Pa. yietCii 4f 1ii 1Tei nt a ;erSi.vHri; vin Ian . - to ��it - -- - - -� -Grt - -rs�rt tat is -- stn nr- -- -- - - ;r a- - - -- - - i; - - -- v �r 1 subdivision, or plat. A local government shall not use such voluntary 2 agreements- for local off -site transportation improvements within the 3 geographic boundaries of the area or areas covered by an adopted 4 transportation program authorized by chapter 39.92 RCW. Any such 5 voluntary agreement is subject to the following provisions: .6 (1) The payment shall be held in a reserve account and may only be 7 expended to fund a capital improvement agreed upon by the parties to 8 mitigate the identified, direct impact; 9 (2) The payment shall be expended in all cases within five years of 10 collection; and 11 (3) Any payment not so expended shall be refunded with interest to 12 be calculated from the original date the deposit was received by the 13 county and at the same rate applied to tax refunds pursuant to RCW 14 84.69.100; however, if the payment is not expended within five years 15 due to delay attributable to the developer, the payment shall be 16 refunded without interest. 17 No county, city, town, or other municipal corporation shall require 18 any payment as part of such a voluntary agreement which the county, 19 city, town, or other municipal corporation cannot establish is 20 reasonably necessary as a direct result of the proposed development or 1 plat. 22 Nothing in this.section prohibits cities, towns, counties, or other 23 municipal corporations from collecting reasonable fees from an 24 applicant for a permit or other governmental approval to cover the cost 25 to the city, town,.county, or other municipal corporation of processing 26 applications, inspecting and reviewing plans, or preparing detailed 27 statements required by chapter 43.21C RCW. 28 This section does not limit the existing authority of any county, 29 city, town, or other municipal corporation to impose special 30 assessments on property specifically benefitted thereby in the manner 31 prescribed by law. 32 Nothing in this section prohibits counties, cities, or towns from 33 imposing or permits counties, cities, or towns to impose water, sewer, 34 natural gas, drainage utility, and drainage system charges: PROVIDED, 35 That no such charge shall exceed the proportionate share of such 36 utility or system's capital costs which the county, city, or town can 37 demonstrate are attributable to the property being charged: PROVIDED p. 7 SHB 2014 L._l - tittaii not be 3nterpretei? t0 expand or 2 contract anv existing authoritv of counties, cities, or towns to impose 3 such charues. 4 Nothing in this section prohibits a transportation benefit district i rol i i tt pQSinu Lees or charges au Ghori l e' i n KCW 31 0 F i . � I V nor �irotiiiiits 6 the legislative authoritv of a county, city, or town from aoprovina the i impo5ition or such fee:3 within a tram s- or +`_atioi1 bene`1! L district. Noth i nQ in this section! prohil -fits .counties, cities, or towns iroiit 5 li[lpOS3P.j tranSporta -tlon impaut fees authorized pursuant to chapter in =iq Pi Pr TAT it 'v'othilly ? n t1i�s sect_on prohibits counties, cities, or tvw_is from 12 requiring property owners to provide relocation assistance to tenants J tincac_ P, CW 0 anei 5 ✓.18 .4 5i1. 14 Nottiincr in this section.i.ir€its. the authority of counties, cities, ? v or i liwila LD liTit le??lerit prouraTis .;on _1 �Lcnt with rxi _ �%. i vA. J4 V, nor 4o in entorce aureeItnents 7Tade oursi]an.t to st,.ch. procrranns. -- - -= 1 i ii _L5 Sect -LGT. does liV i_ at.i.-I� -liy to 1%J aCt?:RCi' ursilan?- to Titles -'-,4, Ctr 0 RUv , =tor is the authority l9 conferrer by these titles attect.ed.. 2U NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. A .iew section i✓ udded to chapter b4.34 RCW _ ; G.l to ica� a r 'S it�, sls =,we5� 22 All- cities and counties manning under RCW 36.70A.04Q, which have -J allowea any ._c- ?nverzsicin i:,oi.!i<<t1C1±11.it..li--J w_+____L 1 -?ie i - 1sU1Gt._ -oar wlta`e -i1 t�!e 2 orevious twelve- month ner'1od. ;bust include the to_l._lowina performance _ t�edSl.ire- rClcttC+,l l,k C1 t_d lSi an d:iln llai to %1ac 1..1+G'iJ C1i l.iltCilL isL 2i_ t_tirl-t iluill tv, ti a. Vie- and ecc-mio.iTl.! c deve i O TD l ent . i m,..Y rO-- , jHIC,ur :?T �`y t..t t✓�i i � v {> l re L t C_ 1I1_ �_ld_ i':i1 __ 1a frt_._L 1.1:1_ C_ ? "i• Y CL. iIt In t`rltir "1[viY i it i ttiir4 7 - e:.✓ t.G. j SiiC t.,V t,di ii UiiiiJ�i iii l�viiVCi;✓i +.iii i. Cii.t i,i Vlt.t_il! Uiii >ii Cl ,j c+.: t.J/ 30 f31 tar The dJit.i.e- r_-r_icc - t tie �rttill.v rerlt a__ �tGUS.i ±!Q. C "os•t r3fi Far_h -, , ,11 ioritier I-entai 11 i!'t, i-iia i, 10 coil i %ci i.eu, diii,t t, 01 ic iiiCii!titiyv !�tol tgci gC l.V:�t _i, of -he owner occuua.n v CCtriCi rt1.r11u!el to Which 1t is conver ,_r{ or the L. _ - - - 1 _ - _ .-- _ _ _ -. - _ _ _ _ _ i _ L - L L _ - !.J.St -7Cl. t4C4+t liti -iii i..iliY ittVi i-UCI I�C \.V:.]L Vi L11C 4uiiU Vliii i±it,llti i4 ti '+Niii�ti 14 l:� lil 1-.2ic .:1 4 orr t_ >oE_ss u— be -- --t! converi -ed.- - - L Oz df -�dli. i!ic11 i.. i.Ciidii i.. .:: di1CLt..Ci..i iJy c-r.vTel s -. In who eii=ct to 1_,u.r chase d C 0 n' G 7i!.1 Tj 113:1 -1, W1.Li1, in th.e Levta i i iiD Tci. Fn : ri l t, _ 1 (5) The total number of apartment tenants who receive relocation 2 assistance, the total amount of that assistance per tenant, and income 8 housing units affordable to low and very -low income households. 3 information for all tenants who received relocation assistance; 9 NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. This act takes effect August 1, 2007. 4 (6) Income information for all tenants in units that were con verted 5 into condominiums; and 6 (7) The net change in the total number of rental housing units 7 within the jurisdiction and the net change in the number of rental 10 NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. This act does not apply to any conversion 11 condominiums for which a notice required under RCW 64.34.440(1) has 12 been delivered before the effective date of this act:. - -- END - -- P. 9 SHB 2014 l 4300 SW Holly Street, Seattle, Washington 98136 -1711 Patty Dupre tel (206) 935 -3459 e -mail patty @dsaa.com Mike Scott tel (206) 935 -3458 e -mail apts @dsaa.com fax (206) 935 -6763 web site www.dsaa.com apartment advisors, inc Condominium conversion and its impact on the rental market July 20, 2007 Chris Cordes, the Assistant Director of the Office of Program Research for the Washington House of Representatives asked us to provide some data about condominium conversion trends in preparation for a Housing Committee meeting on August 3rd in Seattle to discuss the effect of condominium conversion on affordable housing. This report on condominium conversion trends and its impact on the rental market is for King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties. Units per year; 5 -unit and larger properties Prepared June 24, 2007 County 2000 2001. 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007p King 873 171 236 722 1,002 3,088 4,920- 2,094 Pierce 98 18 45 249 78 371 348 Snohomish 24 213 417 852 1,497 401 3 Total 971 189 305 935 1,668 .4,018 6,788 2,843 Source: Dupre + Scott Apartment Advisors www.dsaa.com Condominium Conversion List • Developers opened 28,400 new market rate apartment units between 2000 and. 2007.' • 17,700 apartment. units either converted or are planned to "convert to condominiums since 2000.2 • Conversions reduced the rental stock by 15,059 units.3 • Conversions retained 2,700 rental units.' • Almost 4,700 rental units were created between 2000 and 2007 through the rental of new condominiums.5 • Rental supply grew by 18,000 units between 2000 and 2007, after deducting units lost to conversions." • The net increase in rental demand totaled 14,100 units between 2000 and 2007.' Page 1 of 3 3 of 3 Endnotes ' This information is for 5 -unit and larger properties. The total amount of development was 28,374 units. Our April 2007 edition of The Apartment Development Report shows 26,955 market rate apartment units opened in the 2000 -2007 time period in 20- unit and larger properties. We do not publish a report for 5-19 unit properties, or survey developers, architects, etc. for information on these developments. However, we do maintain a database of 5-19 unit properties for our rental and investment market research. Based on the relationship between the inventory of 5-19 unit properties compared to 20 -unit and larger properties built since 1990, we estimate 1,419 market rate apartment units were added in 5 -19 unit properties between 2000 and 2007. This represents 5% of the total market rate apartment units added in this period. 2 This information is for 5 -unit and larger properties. The total number of units converted in this time period is 17,717. This information is from our June 2007 publication; the Condominium Conversion List. The list reports properties that either have converted to condominiums or plan to convert to condominiums. Although the June report covers only a partial year, the total reported here is a reasonable total for the entire 2000 -2007 time period because most future buyers of apartment properties intending to convert those units to condominiums will most likely not have time to complete or even begin the _conversion process until next year. In addition, we have begun to see instances of a shift in the market, where condominiums are converting to apartments. 3 The total number of units converted in this time period is 17,717. Between 10 and 20% of all condominium units. are rented rather than occupied by the homeowners. This figure is based on sample research we have conducted and interviews with condominium converters, condominium marketing firmsiAevelopers,,and. lenders. There are exceptions.on both, the low and high side, include one large property _where'we were informed more than 40 %'of the condominiums were.occupied by renters rather than homeowners. Based on an average of 1b% entals, we estimate that 15059 units in condominium conversions are occupied by homeowners. a Based on 17,717 condominium conversion units between 2000 and 2007 and 15% of those units occupied by renters rather than homeowners_ The result is 2,658 rental units. 5Conway Pedersen Economics reports multifamily permits between 2000 and 2007 in King, Pierce, Snohomish; Kitsap, and Island counties totaled 73,000 units. Deducting the 28,374 market rate apartment units opened in that period leaves 44,626 permitted units that were not market rate.apartments. We estimated 30% of those units were either outside King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties, or were non- profit or subsidized rental housing, or were not built. That leaves 31,238 units as estimated condominium construction between 2000 and 2007. If 15% of those units are rented rather than occupied by homeowners, condominium development between 2000 and 2007 added 4,686 additional rental units. 6 This is from the combination of 10,657 additional units in traditional market rate apartments after deducting the impact of. - conversions, 2,658 units in apartments that converted to condominiums between 2000 and 2007, and 4,700 units in new condominium development between 2000 and 2007. The net change in demand totaled 14,121 units. - This is based on 5,708 units in 20 -unit and larger apartments between March 2000 and March 2007, based on our April 2007 edition of The Apartment Vacancy Report. We estimated the net increase in rental demand between L000 and 2007 was 1,362 units in 5-19 unit properties, 2,658 units in condominium conversions, and 4,686 units in new condominium construction between 2000 and 2007. s Our Fall 2006 edition of The Apartment Vacancy Report shows that the average annual turnover in apartments was 49.8% in the five years .ending September 2006. That equates to an average tenure of two years. s Conversions reduce the number of rental units resulting in lower vacancies and higher rents which lead to improved financial feasibility for new apartment development, as demonstrated by our 2009 forecast. 10 Our weekly update of The Apartment Investment Report shows that apartment properties sold so far in 2007, scheduled to convert to condominiums, had anticipated gross income 4% above the gross income at the time of purchase. The rent forecast is from our April 2007 issue of The Apartment Advisor. 11 This is based on our forecast of 12,643 new units in 20 -unit and larger developments, published in the April edition of our Apartment Development Report, plus an estimate of 665 units in 5 -19 unit market rate rental developments (based on the traditional relationship between smaller and larger property activity discussed elsewhere in the memorandum). Our forecast for the next 12 months has typically been close to actual development. Our forecast for the period 13-24 months out has overstated actual development in recent years. However, we have not changed our forecast methodology because we believe the overstatement until now was the result of a deteriorating rental market making projects less feasible each month. Now, however, we anticipate an improving rental market should correct that error. 12 Our development forecast (discussed above) expects 13,000 new apartment units between 2008 and 2009. In addition, new condominium construction estimated at 13,000 units will generate 2,000 rental units. We-estimated 7,000 units of condominium conversions, with 85% of those units occupied by homeowners, for a net loss of 5,950 rental units. 13 The net annual average increase in rental stock is based on the net change in the rental stock published in the online edition of our Apartment Development Report updated in April 2007 and also adjusts for.additions from 5 -19 unit apartment developments, and rental units in new condominium construction. during that period (estimated as 50% of total 20 -unit and larger apartment development). Dupre + Scott Apartment Advisors w Packet for Legislators, Press, and Public Condominium.. Conversions. - it's impact on the region's rental housing market and on. the stock of low income housing - John V. Fox Seattle Displacement Coalition 4554 12t' NE Seattle, Wa. 98105 M4119gzipcon.net 206- 632 -0668 3 buildings at these per unit prices. Clearing $120,000 per unit, and selling each for over $300,000, he likely realized about $36 million on a 2 -3 year turnaround on his investment. * There also has been an unprecedented shift away from rental housing construction and towards condominium development. This shift to condominiums coupled with the high loss of rentals due to conversion (and also demolitions) has translated directly into a growing and significant net loss in the rental stock since 2005 throughout the 3 County area. This trend will continue at least through 2007 and shows no sign of abating beyond that. From 2005 thru 2006, the region saw a net loss of over 5400 rental units (new rentals minus units lost to conversion). And this year we are on pace to see a net loss of another 2600 rental units. (Dupre and Scott note that since 2000 we have seen a net gain in rentals but they fail to note that the most of the new rental construction occurred before 2005 with most of the losses due to conversion occurred since '05. And this trend shows no sign of abating. Dupre and Scott acknowledge they substantially underestimated levels of conversion occurring since '05 and that they overestimate projected new rental construction. In spite of current trends they are projecting significant increases in rental construction in '08 and '09. While demand no doubt will drive an increase in the number of newly constructed rentals — there will remain a bias towards condominium construction and conversion. I see no sign of the high levels of rental construction they predict nor are there any signs that conversins will dminkh sulbstantiall in fltue var.0 n i - -- - - e * Dupre and Scott note a net gain of 18,000 rentals since '07 regionally — four thousand units above what they predicted would be needed to meet increased demand. As pointed out above, Dupre and Scott fail to note that real gains in the stock occurred before the explosion of conversions began in 2005. Their figures also don't subtract out the number of rentals we've lost regionally due to demolition. In Seattle alone, we've lost at,least 5000 rental units to demolition. That drops their estimated net gain from 18;000; to 13,000 rentals — already well below their projected demand for this period. * Area wide vacancy rates continue to fall especially within those areas now experiencing high levels of conversions. (see page 2 attached) In parts of Seattle, North King County and S. Snohomish County ' where conversions are highest, vacancy rates have fallen to record low levels— around 2 percent - well _ below the 5% ideal threshold. Not surprisingly many of these areas saw rents jump by 11 -13 percent. Given the expected job increases in Seattle and throughout the region (75,000 jobs or more in the next three years) bring many new residents to the area, we can expect an appreciable gain in demand for rentals at a time when the actual supply has fallen by about 7000 units. This translates directly into even higher rents, more displacement of lower income renters, an increased demand for subsidized units, and more homelessness. * According to the 2006 King County Housing Benchmarks Report (see page 3 attached), in the County (including Seattle), there is a.shortfall of 68,000 rental units affordable to those with incomes at or below 40% of area median. Nearly 70,000 low income households already are paying more than they can afford — as many as 40 percent paying 40,50, 60 percent or more of their income on rent. By contrast, you'll note this report shows a surplus of 101,000 rental units affordable to those with incomes between 80 and 100 percent of median. At least half of the conversions displace low income households. The converted units, it has been argued fill a need for those with incomes between 80 and 100 percent of median — a income group that has a surplus of 10 1,000 rentals available to them. This group also has a plentiful supply of condominiums available to them. Further, the average priced converted condo is not any less expensive than a newly constructed one. And on a per sq. ft. basis, that converted condo actually will cost the first time owner buyer more than a newly built condo. * In Seattle and throughout the region, for every one unit of "subsidized" housing we produce, we are losing 3 to 4 times that amount of existing low.cost rentals to demolition, condominium conversion,' speculative sale and. increased rent. With the ten year plan we take one step forward, but due to these current market forces, we are taking 3 to 4 steps backward. And lacking any form of government intervention to stem these housing losses, there is no sign that these conditions will not prevail in future years. rate of condo conversion is unprecedented y subarea or neighborhood: No area of 3 county area is immune Conversions Broken Down by Neighborhood _ 2004 -2007 to date I L First Hill Gig Harbor Greenlake Wall Issaquah Juanita Kent Kirkland Lakewood Lynwood Magnolia Marysville /mon Mid Tacoma Mill Creek Mountlake Terri_ North Seattle Area 8 total units number of projects 71 2 Auburn Ballard Beacon Hill Bellevue East Belltown Bothell Bremerton Capitol Hill /Eas Central Seattle Central Everett Des Moines Dwtwn Tacoma Edmonds Factoria Federal Wav 290 4 '25 242 22 166 6 660 14 310 5 509 3 209 1` 5461 23 1 3681 12 1911 6 3861 6 409 18 434 11 542 7 590 6 L First Hill Gig Harbor Greenlake Wall Issaquah Juanita Kent Kirkland Lakewood Lynwood Magnolia Marysville /mon Mid Tacoma Mill Creek Mountlake Terri_ North Seattle 554 8 71 2 total units Vacanc, 440 '25 . ' 5 78 534 6 6 133 841 9 25 Region 109 2 Kg, Pierce, Snoh 482 8 King 1.45 5 Kg- North 621 7 Kg- Central 145 7 Kg -East 60 1 Kg -South 42 3 1 Kg -SE 362 3 2 Pierce 109 2 Rates. by Subarea Snoh. 592 181 Scott) 2bd /2bth 4.9 4.6 4.5 2.4 4.9 4.5 2.9 5.1 5.5 4.4 12.4 _ Kitsae sources for material on all 3 pages drawn from Dupre and Scott, City, and County Sources I Seattle Displacement Coalition Prepared by John V. Fox August 1st Page 2 Area total units number of projects North Tacoma Olympia 1 Paine Field Puyallup /Sumner Queen Anne Rainier Valley Redmond Renton Seatac Shoreline Silver Lake South Tacoma Thrashers Corner University W. Seattle Burien White Center Woodinville/Totem La 288 . ' 5 78 1 689 6 133 4 742 25 30 1 282 5 281 3 296 2 240 6, 504 6 '76 2 266 2 104 1 -459 12 17 1 15 2 243 2 Rates. by Subarea as of June 07 1 bdrm 3.8 3.8 3.3 2.1 3.1 3.0 3.2 4.3 5.5 3.2 5.8 (Dupre and bd /l bth 4.7 4.6 4.1 2.2 3.8 4.1 4.2 4.8 6.0 4.2 7.3 Scott) 2bd /2bth 4.9 4.6 4.5 2.4 4.9 4.5 2.9 5.1 5.5 4.4 12.4 (by percent vacant) All studio 4.3 3.3 4.3 3.3 3.9 3.0 2.1 0.9 3.2 2.5 3.9 3.7 3.5 2.7 4.9 5.9 5.8 5.8 4.0 4.4 - -- 7.8 5.4 sources for material on all 3 pages drawn from Dupre and Scott, City, and County Sources I Seattle Displacement Coalition Prepared by John V. Fox August 1st Page 2 Median sale price of converted unit in Seattle vs median sale price of all condos sold and price per sq. ft (according to recent city of Seattle Housing Study): 1 bedroom units: all 1 bd. condos sold: $250,000 price per sq ft: $388 converted 1 b units sold: $249,500 price per sq ft: $392 2 bedroom units: all 2b condos sold: $340,00 price per sq ft: $367 converted 2b units sold: $310,000 price per sq ft: $367 Return on Conversions is very lucrative: Here are some examples of what happens to the price of affordable apartment buildings when they are sold to developers and subsequently converted. The time for government to provide "home purchase" incentives for the residing tenants is before these rental buildings are sold to those doing the converting - when units still are relatively affordable to acquire: 7600 Greenwood Ave N: In November 2005, this 24 unit rental building sold at a price of $142,188 per unit. With n a year, the L ^.dll�idual �cn�,Pl ted �ynjtg in that building wPri- gPllhng for $290,000 to $32n 000 per unit. Subtract $30,000 /unit in renovation cost and on 24 unit, owner still realizes about 120,000 per unit X 24 equals $2.8 million. 8820 Nesbitt Apartments: This 13 unit apartment building sold for about $138,000 per unit on March 1" '07 and now they are selling each unit as a condo for $245,000 to $250,000 per unit. Subtract $30,000 /unit renovation costs and on 13 units, the owner realized about,$90,000 per unit X 13 equals $1.17 million 3661 Phinney Ave N.'Apartments: This 36 unit apartment sold for $116,000 per unit in November of '05 and now they are selling individual converted units for $254,000 to $350,000 per unit. Subtract $30,000 /unit in renovation costs and on 36 units this owner realized at least 100,000 /unit or at minimum $3.6 million. 732 11 th Ave. E: This 22 unit rental apartment was acquired in August 2000 for about $188,000 per,unit. It recently was converted and the units in that building now are selling for:about $415,000. Subtract out`$30,000 /unit in renovation costs and owner still realized about 190,000 per unit X 22 and that equals $4.18 million 1550 Eastlake Ave. E: This 30 unit building sold in January '04 at a price of about 142,000 per unit and now the converted units are being offered for sale at prices ranging from $414,000 and $424,000 per unit. Subtract out $30,000 /unit in renovation costs.and owner still sees a return of at least $200,000 per unit X that by 30 and that equals $6 million One developer in Seattle converted 3 buildings totaling 300 units acquiring all for on average 150,000 per unit. Each unit was sold for on average $300,000 /unit. 'Assuming he put 30,000 into each unit for renovation he still sees a return of 120,000 per unit X 300 equals $36 million in total return. * These high returns are what is driving the amount of condominium conversion. There remains in Seattle and the 3-County Area a significant supply of older apartment buildings that are suitable for conversion. As long'as the demand for condo's remains. high (as is expected given the dramatic influx of new residents accompanying expected new job growth in the region), we can expect'to see conversions continue at accelerated rates. The quick turnaround and high returns associated with conversion make it too lucrative not to see it continue. We also can expect to see most new construction continue to go into condo construction rather than new apartment construction. Without government action, the net effect will be continued net rental housing losses in Seattle and the region and net loss of very low income rentals MFTE/Tenant Displacement Issues Valerie Jackson From: Marty Dickinson Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 11:21 PM To: Valerie Jackson Subject: FW: MFTElrenant Displacement Issues Attachments: 1991_001. pdf V Pls print this and the attachement. M From: John Bennett [r6ailto:Bennett @ tblack.com] Sent: Tue 7/3/2007 12:09 PM To: maryv @aimcomm.com; Werner @spokanecity.org Subject: MFTE/Tenant Displacement Issues Glad we met yesterday. Memorandum attached. Have a great 4th. John M. Bennett, CPM President Tomlinson Black Management,'Inc. 107 South Howard, Suite 600 Spokane, WA 99201 (509)622 -3501 (509)622 -3500 facsimile - - - -- Original Message---- - From: "MGMT_Canon" Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 12:08 PM To: "John Bennett" <bennett@tblack.com> Subject: Attached Image 7/9/2007 Page 1 of 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mary Verner FROM: John M. Bennett DATE: July 3, 2007 RE: Multifamily Tax Exemption Low Income Tenant Dislocation and Relocation I consider that our meeting yesterday was beneficial, and I hope that both of us came away with new perspectives and ideas. I am professionally committed to assist on these two issues where possible. Notwithstanding that commitment, I would not want to interfere with the activities of the Mayor- Appointed housing task force that Marty Dickinson is chairing. As we agreed yesterday, all of these problems must be addressed in manageable chunks with incremental progress made when available. Multifamily Tax Exemption (METE) As I have told you and voiced to the Council and other audiences, I was disappointed to see the Legislature reduce the MPTE for market -rate housing to eight years. My reconnaissance tells me that no modifications of the MFTE are likely in the 2006 Legislature, so, for now, this carve -out issue is off the table. The change of market -rate housing back to ten years is currently a dormant issue for me. I feel strongly that the ten -year METE should apply to market -rate housing in downtowns and possibly centers and corridors with the objective being tied down to GMA principles for housing density and concurrency. The issues I view as being currently on the table are whether the City should modify the income limits set forth in the 2007 legislation for mixed- income projects qualifying for the 12 -year MFTE and whether the eligible METE boundaries should be modified by the City. It is my personal and professional opinion that the income limits set by the Legislature were prudent and will incentivize the highest possible level of multifamily unit production. The counter - argument to that stance is that if the METE limits were capped at 35 %, 50 %, or 60% of area median income (AW by reserving METE eligible units for the most needy apartment seekers, the benefits would be better. targeted and delivered. I have serious concerns that if the City departed from the State set limits, less development would take place and the total number of units potentially available to the lowest income cohort will be less than under State limits. You also take away the value -added benefits for work force targeted rental housing in the CBD, as well as almost any potential that MFIB could be used for -sale housing (condominiums). It is not a bad thing to do two things at once; those being to incent low- income housing while promoting higher multifamily densities downtown and in centers and corridors for GMA purposes. Mary Verner Page 2 July 3, 2007 I believe that it is important to convey to the media and public that the MFTE program is not the proximate cause of the displacement of the New Madison, Otis, or Commercial Building low - income and special needs residents. The New Madison and Otis Apartments suffer severe economic and functional obsolescence and the Otis is rumored to have code compliance problems. The Commercial Building is being emptied out for conversion to a higher and better commercial use. With respect to the question of whether the boundaries for N= eligibility should be modified, I would argue that they should not be constricted and if any redrawing of the boundaries needs to be done to bring in areas peripheral to the existing boundaries that make logical sense, I would support that. I will vehemently oppose any proposal to withdraw rental and/or condominium housing downtown from eligibility as being indirect contravention of the Downtown Plan, Comprehensive Plan, and sound economic development principles. In my analysis of ESSHB 1910, I do not find the establishment of regulatory and compliance protocol for the jurisdictions adopting the 12 -year mixed - income MFTE. I voiced in several forums my concern about this deficiency. I am hoping that WSHFC or CTED can assist the cities in this regard. Displacement and Relocation of Low - Income Tenants As discussed yesterday, this is really a two -part problem; the first being how to meet the housing needs of those being displaced starting now throughout the course of the summer. Social service agencies and housing providers are working diligently together to find solutions, but as we agreed, there are no easy answers. There is a diminishing stock of single -room occupancy (SRO) and other low -cost apartment units downtown. Social service agencies are co- located in large numbers in the CBD near their clients. It is highly unlikely that all of the displaced tenants can be relocated within the core. I will defer to other housing providers, social service agencies, and government to work together to meet the immediate crisis. When we analyze potential solutions, it is important that we understand that relocation of the residents of the three above - referenced buildings will not be the last time we face this challenge. The solutions we choose should be models that can be relied upon in the future when the next displacements occur. We cannot marshal such a large component of public or non -profit cash or borrowing capacity to solve the immediate problem where it's a one- time band -aid that cannot be reapplied in the future. If $325 is the rent level that is affordable by the residents of these buildings, it will be difficult and nearly impossible to place them elsewhere at a like expense given supply and demand. The economics are compounded by the fact that some of the downtown buildings include central heat and the market in general calls for tenant -paid heat and electricity. That exacerbates the affordability issue. Mary Verner Page 3 July 3, 2007 In a perfect world, a number of the residents in these buildings would possess Section 8 housing choice rent subsidy vouchers, which are portable and can be used at the rental location of the tenant's choosing, provided that they meet HUD/PHA Housing Quality Standards (HQS). It is inconceivable to me that the Otis is meeting HUD HQS. I don't know as to whether the New Madison does. Inquiries should be made of Steve Cervantes of Northeast Washington Housing Solutions (SHA) as to whether any of the subject residents are in the Section 8 program. The tenant portion of Section 8 rents is income - based, so moving to a higher rent apartment would not have as significant an impact as for those paying the full rent themselves. I am certain that Steve has looked into whether HUD has any emergency programs for adding new voucher authority because of the crisis caused by these displacements, and found that no such opportunity exists. Yesterday we talked about my opinion that we cannot solve the inventory problem through the construction of new housing stock without project -based rent subsidy attached. If you assume that the prevailing cost of operating newly constructed apartments is between $200 - $250 per apartment per month and that the subject tenants can only afford $325 per month, it would leave between $75 - $125 per month to service debt on new housing at a break -even level. Financed over 25 years at 8 %, it would support between $9,700 - $16,200 in construction costs; a fraction of the cost of acquiring land and building new apartments. We discussed the benefits and mechanics of the Low - Income Tax Credit program for new construction. That is a tool to develop affordable housing targeted at between 30% and 60% AMI, but even with the benefits of the LIHTC program, the unsubsidized rents are unlikely to drop to the level these residents can support. One viable alternative for the City and the community is to focus on preservation of existing SRO housing downtown through carrots (and not the stick). The City already practices outreach to building owners on low- interest loan and other incentive programs. The City should look to fill its tool box to the maximum with incentives for preservation of SRO and one - bedroom apartments downtown. Periodic briefings should be held targeting owners of these buildings where they can voice their needs to keep the buildings operating, and City staff and non - profits can respond as to available resources. We could just as easily be having this dialogue because several buildings were shuttered either for economic hardship or code violation reasons as for redevelopment. When we look at the potential for implementing the State low- income tenant relocation statute on a municipal basis, we must consider that building owners who close buildings because they can't afford to keep them open should not face economic sanctions in terms of relocation reimbursement mandates. The course of economic and real estate development will also take some of these buildings out of the inventory. In particular, as the Fox Theater reopens there will be momentum to upgrade properties in a several block radius. Obstacles should not be put in front of that natural progression. Not only will there be economic development benefits, but crime prevention and other positive outcomes. Private property rights need to be respected. Mary Verner Page 4 July 3, 2007 If the City were to enact RCW 59.18.440 as written with respect to compensation to low- income tenants for displacement, a project like the Otis would bear more than $200,000 in relocation costs at maximum levels. That would be an impediment to the viability of the redevelopment of the existing structures. More important, if you look at the elements contained in RCW 59.18.440, which include but are not limited to moving costs, first and last month's rent, utility deposits, and payment of rent and utility differential for a year, that program is nothing more that a one -year band -aid. When removed, the displaced resident would be faced with an economic disconnect if the ongoing rent for the new apartment is more than their affordability limit. Long -term solutions need to be in the forefront. The real estate industry (apartment owners and operators) will work with the City to look for best practices as to how other communities are drafting and implementing such ordinances. I do not consider the Seattle model to represent a balanced approach that would be healthy for the City of Spokane to pursue. As we are able to gather information on solutions, the real estate community can share those ideas with policy makers and the Mayor's task force. Given the wide -range and nature of our discussion yesterday, I wanted to set forth my thoughts in writing to memorialize my current state of mind on the issues we discussed. I hope this is helpful. Thank you for your leadership on this issue. P r. Office of the City Manager CONSENT CALENDAR July 10, 2007 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Phil Kamlarz, City-Manager..,: Submitted by: Dan Marks, Director of Planning and Development Subject: Amendment of BMC - Condominium Conversion RECOMMENDATION That the Berkeley City Council adopt a first reading of an ordinance amendingBerkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Section 21:28.065.13:1' to clarify that the affordable housing mitigation fee cap of 12.5 % of unit sales prices applies to both`vacant and tenant occupied units withiri•a building, if the owner agrees to the specified long -term limit on rent increases for all current tenants within that building at the time of conversion. FISCAL IMPACTS OF- RECOMMENDATION If this amendment is not adopted, the applicants of fifteen Condominium Conversion. projects are expected to withdraw their applications, thereby precluding their payment of affordable Housing. fees equal to 12.5% of the selling price of 61 condominium units. CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS Fifteen pending condominium conversion applications include vacant units. Owners of these properties have long expected the 12.5% cape on the affordable housing mitigation fee (hereafter referred to as the fee)', as a provided in BMC Section 21.28.W.B, to apply to all of their units. However -this section of the BMC as written does not provide for this application of the 12.56% cap. Therefore, unless the Council adopts a clarifying amendment to BMC Section 2128.065.13, we expect most of these owners to withdraw their applications. As mentioned above, this action would have serious negative impacts on the City's Housing Trust Fund and would create an incentive for these owners to create Tenants in Common rather than. convert to condominiums. 1 BMC Section 21.28.060, defines a fee to be paid at the time of sale for each unit converted from Rental to Condominium status. BMC section 21.28.065 provides for reductions in this fee in certain cases. 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981 -7000 TDD: 510.981 -6903 Fax: 510.981 -7099 e -mail: manager @ci.berkeley.ca.us Amendment of BMC Section 21.28.065.13 1 CONSENT CALENDAR July 10, 2007 BACKGROUND Converting rental units into condominiums requires payment of a significant affordable housing fee to the City of Berkeley Housing Trust Fund; this fee recaptures for the City's affordable housing programs an amount that reflects the differential affordability between the rental unit being converted and the condominium. This amount is then used to provide affordable housing. Due to its significant size, the fee has discouraged conversions by removing most or all of the financial incentive. At the same time, since 1992, the City has prohibited the creation of tenancies in common (TICs). In 2005, after the courts held that cities could not prohibit the formation of TICs, the Council decided to revise the Condominium Conversion Ordinance to encourage conversions as a preferable alternative to TICs. Since then, the City Council has adopted numerous amendments to the Condominium Conversion Ordinance (BMC 21.28) to adjust the affordable housing mitigation fee, under various conditions, to allow a moderate number of rental units to convert to condominiums. Since the last major change in this fee provision (in 2006), City Staff has been describing the reductions in this fee as follows: The affordable housing fee will be capped at 12.5% of the sales price of a unit if the owner commits (1) to limit future rent increases for all "current" tenants to no more than 65%. of the increase. in. the Consume Price Index.for all Bay Area Consumer, and, (2) to.guarantee each "current" tenant this reduced rent for as long as that tenant occupies his or her current unit. Apparently when this amendment was, adopted the term "current tenant" was _ understood. by some to.include any tenant in occupancy.as of the date the map is recorded,.even if there were no current tenants at the time the.owner's commitment were made. Thus, if the - owner made these guarantees for both occupied and vacant units, then the affordable housing fees for all of the units within the building would be capped at this 12.5% limit. As written, however, the plain language of the ordinance provides for this 12.5% cap. on this fee. only for units with current tenants at the time the owner committed to reduced future rent . increases. The City currently has pending applications for 15 Condominium Conversion Projects with one or more vacant units, and until now the owners understood that both their vacant and tenant occupied units were eligible for this reduced fee. If the Ordinance stands as currently written, we expect that many of these applications will be.withdrawn, due to the owners' unwillingness to pay the much higher fee. This assumption reflects Berkeley's many years of experience with the.full affordable housing fee in place, which resulted in almost no conversions from rental to condominium units. Council had initially introduced this lower cap on this fee, along with some other provisions in the Ordinance, in order to allow a modest number of rental units to be converted to condominiums each year, while simultaneously building.up the Housing Trust Fund. The Housing Trust Fund would then be used to provide additional rental housing units in Berkeley at below market rate rents. Amendment of BMC Section 21.28.065.13 1 CONSENT CALENDAR July 10, 2007 The attached proposed Ordinance amends BMC Section 21.28.065.13.1 to reflect the original intent of this section, which is to provide a cap on the Affordable Housing fee of 12.5% of the sales value of the sales price of a unit, applying this cap to all units converting to condominiums, as long as the owner has agreed in advance to the guaranteed reduced rent as specified in the Ordinance. This 12.5% cap applies to both vacant and occupied rental units. After review staff is confident that these amendments accomplish this purpose. If adopted, the current applicants would be able to proceed through the condominium conversion program with their current understanding of this 12.5% cap on the fee. RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION Should City staff implement BMC Section 21.28.06513 as currently written, then numerous applicants would likely withdraw their applications, resulting in very little condominium conversion and encouraging the creation of Tenants In Common, which staff believes is a much less stable form of property ownership and potentially detrimental to sitting tenants. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED In the Fall 2007, Staff intends to conduct the Condo Conversion Workshop with the Council; at this time we expect to present options for streamlining and simplifying the procedures, including a reconsideration of the Ordinance as a whole. Numerous amendments over the years have resulted in some unintended consequences and a convoluted process that need to be revised to better reflect the Council's intentions. ' Staff considered delaying this proposed change until Fall 2007, to include as part of the overall "j evaluation of the Ordinance. However staff rejected this approach, since numerous Map Applications are close to completion, requiring development of fee agreements within the next couple of weeks that reflect the Ordinance as written. It seemed inappropriate to ask these applicants either to pay a much higher fee than intended or to wait until Fall 2007 in hopes the Ordinance would be amended to reflect the Council's earlier intent. , C CITY MANAGER The City Manager concurs with the content and recommendations of this request. CONTACT PERSON Debra R. Sanderson, Principal Planner, 981 -7417 Attachments: 1. Proposed Ordinance with proposed new language underlined 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981 -7000 TDD: 510.981 -6903 Fax: 510.981 -7099 e -mail: manager @dberkeley.cams Page 1 of 3 Shogan,Joe From: Joyce Tucker [Joyce @swanlight.com] Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 8:52 PM To: 'Carrie Anderson'; Mayor's @cet.com; Open @cet.com; House @cet.com; Bernard @cet.com; Folks @cet.com Cc: Community Development; French, Al; Apple, Bob; Stark, Brad; Rodgers, Cherie; Hession, Dennis; Shogan, Joe; Verner, Mary Subject: RE: Mayor Hession & the Community Development Committee RE:'Affordable Housing for citizens displaced by the North -South Freeway I apologize for not sending this earlier. I found it in my Drafts box. From: Joyce Tucker [mailto:Joyce @swanlight.comj Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 10:13 AM To: 'Carrie Anderson'; 'Mayor's @cet.com'; 'Open @cet.com'; 'House @cet.com'; 'Bernard@cet.com'; 'Folks @cet.com' Subject: To: Mayor Hession & the Community Development Committee RE: Affordable Housing for citizens displaced by the North -South Freeway What is going to happen to all of the low- moderate income people who will be displaced by the North -South Freeway, e.g. between Altamont &.Thor? These are City of Spokane citizens, some whom have lived in their homes for decades, facing the. .,prospect of a huge displacement in their later years when they are least able to manage it on fixed incomes. Not all of them have families, or relatives close by they can depend on for informal support. Some of them are at high risk for homelessness. Affordable housing is the single most important issue to stabilize citizens, thus reducing a city's overall emergency services' costs. I just watched a news segment on reducing homelessness on the McNeil -Lehr News on Channel 7 last night. http: / /www.pbs.org /newshour /bb /social issues /jan june07 /homeless 04 =27 html "Doctors at the University of California, San Diego, and the San Diego Po /ice Department studied 95 chronic homeless and found, in a year and a half, the go vernment spent an a verage of $200, 000 p t Per person in treatment, law enforcement. fail and court costs, hospital visits. The other finding of the study was, at the end of that 18 months, those 95 people were in the same condition and same situation as before. They were still on the same street corners and the same doorways. " "Port /and found, for example, that even with the cost ofhous/ng >, 000 ofits homeless its overa// expenditures on the homeless dropped by 35 percent as arrests of its homeless fell47percent, and emergency room visits at hospitals declined. Four hospitals actually contributed $300, 000 for housing so their discharged patients have somewhere else to go. So instead of the person using the emergency room of the hospital at $1, 000 a night as kind of respite unit from the streets or a she /ter from the street, that person is using the emergency room much less frequent /y. " ° "Perhaps the most ambitious experiment is 150 miles up the road in Seattle, at a 8/27/2007 Page 2 of 3 facility called 981 9 East lake. Seventy -five of Seattle's most desperate street inebriates moved into this brand -new, $99 million, government - funded building last year There's no data yet on the project's cost - effectiveness, but tenants at a similar project in Minneapolis reduced their use of detox facilities, and jail bookings declined. " The Carlyle here in Spokane is an outstanding. example of not only providing housing but in -home assistance for personal care, as well as social and mental health supports required for people with multiple, complex needs: Stable housing is the foundation-for providing case management for the most complex issues. Thanks for listening to a 20 year geriatric& disability mental health "specialist who has the opportunity to see the most underserved, vulnerable, invisible, high -risk and /or high - utilizer elders. I continue doing this work because,l see people stabilize and go on to enjoy a higher quality of life, ( thus not taxing the city's emergency: resources.), Joyce Tucker, LICSW, GMHS, DMHS 5908 East 15th Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99212 -0218 509 - 242 -9980 From: Carrie Anderson [mailto:treelady @cet.com] Sent: Saturday, April 28; 2007 7:52 AM To: Mayor's @cet.com; Open @cet.com; House @cet.com; Bernard @cet.com; Folks @cet.com Subject: Community Development comments FYI my response to the call from the mayor for community development input!! Mayor Hession, In response to your call for input about community development, I believe, if Kendall Yards receives a TIF benefit, they should be required to provide 10 to 20% of their residential units as low to moderately priced housing! Carrie Anderson On Apr 27, 2007, at 4:53 PM, Hession, Dennis wrote: April 27, 2007 How to have your voice heard: To assist in this effort, the advisory committee will continue to need input from each of you. Please consider the following questions: What is working well? What's not working well? 8/27/2007 �4 Zoning the 'enemy' of affordable homes Local USJWorld I Sports Business I iA&E Life 1 Comic I Photos 1 pinion _OCAL Last updated September 19, 2007 11:36 p.m. PT E -mail this Print this IM RSS Zoning the 'enemy' of affordable homes Seattle code needs updating, says housing expert By AUBREY COHEN P -I REPORTER Cities can spur development of homes affordable to. typical workers by changing rules that distinguish among home types and that separate housing from other uses, one of the nation's most prominent experts on work -force housing told a Seattle audience Tuesday. "Local zoning is the No. 1 enemy of work -force housing," Ron Terwilliger, chairman and chief executive of Atlanta -based developer Trammell Crow Residential, said at a talk hosted by the Seattle chapter ' of the Urban Land Institute, a national land -use think tank. Seattle created urban nodes that mix apartments and condos with stores, services and transit. But, with the exception of a recent decision to allow backyard apartments in southeast Seattle, elected officials are reluctant to increase the number of homes allowed in single - family zones, which take up 65 percent of the city's land. "It would seem to me like at least your single - family zoning ought to have some flexibility," Terwilliger said in response to a question on the matter from Seattle Planning and Development Director Diane Sugimura. "It seems like an overallocation of single - family." Residents might be more accepting if they knew more about how, for instance, mixing uses and density does not decrease property values, Terwilliger said. And, he added, members of the business community should make a point of supporting politicians who pledge to address the housing situation. Last year, the typical single person in Seattle earned enough to buy a home for just under $200,000; the typical family of four had enough to pay just over $280,000, the Department of Housing and Urban Development said. Median prices were about $450,000 for a house and $290,000 for a condo. Someone earning 80 percent of the median income could afford the $1,010 monthly rent for an average one - bedroom Seattle apartment, but not the $1,324 average cost for a one - bedroom unit built from Pagel of 3 be I BUV Ad ROVERTISIN LOCAL HEADLINES W.R. Grace can face crimina asbestos deaths. Van on fire causes traffic ba( Power restored in Burien Foster parents survey gives marks 1907 -2007: A century of chi Moore Theatre was once anc scene Seattle bulked up by gobblin Church of the Epiphany is a changing area • 100 years at Childrens Hosp turned away Family puts crime in new rei Quarter of state's foster par( reached • Anti- smoking ads turn off yo ►► more REAL ESTATE HEADLINES Zoning the 'enemy' of afford Foreclosure rate here below Gregoire forms panel to look mortgage woes 'Home stagers' fix up shelter Overweight? Blame your ZIF ►► more A' P LOCAL HEADLINES • NOAA: Wash tribe does not I shoot seals • Man charged with conspiracy http: / /seattlepi.nwsource.com /local /332171_workforceI9.html 9/20/2007 Rating Agency Meetings Moody's Rating Agency Tuesday, September 20, 2007 9:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. Mayor's Conference Room 5th Floor, Spokane City Hall Meeting Agenda 1— City of Spokane Presentation: 9:30 -10:45 Jeff Thomas," Moody's Amy Tanaka, Mood y Is Mayor Dennis Hession John Pilcher, COO y.. Gavin Cooley; CFO Tim. Dunivant;`Budget Director Alan Dashen, Financial Advisor Marshall Farnell, CEO, Spokane. County Harry Sladich, President, Convention & Visitor's Bureau 2 — Regional. Economy - Betsy Cowles, Chairwoman, Cowles Company 10:45 -11:15 3 — Regional Economy -.Tony Bonanzino, Pres. & CEO, Hollister. -Stier Labs 11:15. -11:45 4 — Lunch,Davenport Hotel Palm Court: 12:00 -1:00 Jeff Thomas, Amy Tanaka, Moody's .Mary Verner, City Council, City of Spokane Theresa Sanders, Economic Development Director, City of Spokane. John Pilcher, Gavin Cooley, Alan Dashen 5— Driving Tour (departing from South entrance of Davenport Hotel): 1:15 — 2:30 Cody George, Economic Development, Advisor, City of Spokane Tom Reese, Project Manager, Kendall Yards/Black Rock Theresa Sanders Zoning the 'enemy' of affordable homes e 2004 through 2006, according to figures from HUD and Dupre + Scott Apartment Advisors. ' The cost of urban housing leads many workers to live farther from cities, adding to commutes that cost workers money and time, Terwilliger said. This also is becoming an economic - development issue, he said, as companies move to places where their employees can afford homes. Terwilliger is a former chairman of the Urban Land Institute and the incoming chairman of Habitat for Humanity, and recently donated $10 million, split between the Urban Land Institute and Enterprise Community Partners, to create more homes affordable to middle - income households. Enterprise and the Seattle branch of the Urban Land Institute announced at Tuesday's talk that they would fund a full - time staffer for two years to focus on getting more affordable homes. Terwilliger said that despite his intense interest in work -force housing, even he couldn't build such homes without being able to make a profit. Thanks to high land and construction costs, he said, "We've got to charge probably a minimum of $1,500 a month for a one - bedroom (apartment) and $2,000 for a two - bedroom." Terwilliger would like cities to lower permit fees and parking requirements, streamline permitting and make it easier to rehabilitate existing buildings. He said companies should look into helping provide housing and the federal government should create a new tax credit for worker housing. Some cities are requiring developers to make a certain percentage of homes in new projects affordable. That's not as fair as incentives such as special financing and extra density for projects that include affordable housing, Terwilliger said. "It's a societal problem, I would argue. It shouldn't be just the real estate community trying to address it." P -I reporter Aubrey Cohen can be reached at 206 - 448 -8362 or aubreycohen @seattlepi.com. I Soundoff (36 comments) What do you think? _.._. ....... 0 E -mail this Save and share this article Print this j del.icio.us Digg ®Facebook fl Newsvine E -mail newsletters i Add P -I Local headlines to RSS ? a My web site My Yahoo! , Google ►► More options RDVEP.TISING Page 2 of 3 bribery arrested in Seattle • Coast Guard suspends sears Bellingham, WA • Lab audit backs Russell's bid homicide charges • Squadron of Osprey tilt -rotoi Iraq ►► more AP WEST HEADLINES • NOAA: Wash tribe does not I shoot seals American bullfrogs illegally it Peace Day celebrations plant California to restrict fishing c Developers lose court battle village b. I, more SEATTLE SLOGS The Big Blog By Monica Guzman e editors and staff • Smells like Secret I desperation? Want to propose? Don't forge photographer • Overheard at the morning nc Secretary who? Strange Bedfellow P -I staff on Seattle F Are primary polls n Ron Paul and those Joel Connelly: Whe Flowers Gone? Seattle Real Estate With the P -I's Aubre• f • Head to head They're here to hel National news Seattle Traffic By Reporter Larry La staff .: • Watch for inspectio Seattle bridges New round of viaduct repairs Water taxi to run an additior RDVEPTISIN Horne I Contact Us I About the P -I I Front Page I Corrections I P -I Jobs I Horne Delivery I E- edition I RSS I Mol http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/332171—workforceI9.html 9/20/2007 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS HOUSING RECEIVED PICT 2 5 2007 Olympia Office: 0 417 Legislative Building Spokane Office: PO Box 4o406 Washington State Senate 827 W. First Ave., Suite 318 Olympia, WA 98504 -0406 Spokane, WA 99201 Phone: (360) 786 -7610 Senator Chris Marr Phone: (509) 456 -2450 FAX: (360) 786 -1999 FAX: (509) 456 -2452 E -mail: marr.chris@leg.wa.gov 6th Legislative District Hotline: 1- 800 - 562 -6000 October 23, 2007 Marry Dickinson 211 N. Wall St., Suite 500 Spokane, WA 99201 Re: Offender Re -entry and Affordable Housing Dear Marty, Thank you for your correspondence of October 10, 2007. There's no question that affordable housing is currently a problem in the downtown core of Spokane but fortunately a number of very competent people are engaged in addressing that issue. You do make a good point about the services available to re- entering offenders, `:- and where those services are located. As you know, many offenders choose to live downtown because they don't have cars and an apartment downtown is easily accessible to services and public transportation. These are important issues to take into account when situating services and re -entry level housing.. I appreciate your willingness to continue to look for ways to balance the needs of returning offenders under SB 6157 while maintaining a safe and prosperous downtown. Please feel free to contact my office at any time if you have any questions or concerns. I look forward to working with you and other city leaders as we move forward on this and other critical issues. Committees: Transportation, Vice Chair • Health & Long -Term Care • Human Services & Corrections • Water, Energy & Telecommunications Co Recycled f DOWNTOWN SPOKANE PARTNERSHIP DOWNTOWN SPOKANE .BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DOWNTOWN SPOKANE VENTURES DOWNTOWN S P O K A N E To: Senator Lisa Brown, 3-d District, Senator Chris Marr, 6th District From: Marty Dickinson, President, Downtown Spokane Partnership Date: 10/11/2007 Re: Offender Re -entry and affordable housing Hello Senators Brown and Marr, Thank you for the opportunity to meet regarding the issue of offender re- entry. It is certainly a difficult and challenging problem for this community. The challenge it presents to policy makers is one of finding of balance: on the one hand is the need to protect the community when fewer viable low- income downtown housing options exist On the other is the need to offer opportunity to those former felons who genuinely wish to reform their lives. As we discussed, one of the central components of this issue is the availability of housing for ex- offenders. Given the fact that most recently released offenders are rebuilding their lives from the bottom of the economic ladder, it is safe to assume that one of the most important elements of their reintegration is access to a sizable base of affordable housing. Senate Bill 6157 references this need but places the burden for those decisions (i.e. how affordable housing for ex -offenders will be created and where it will be located) on subsequent legislation. If trends continue, that gap between the need and the availability of affordable downtown housing Nv& only widen. In light of SB6157's requirement for state -wide distribution of residential re -entry centers and the requirement for community consultation "regarding the establishment acid operation of residential reentry centers in their area ", I request that downtowns residential market conditions be strongly factored into that decision making process during the site selection process.. The DSP believes that furthering the well- established precedent of locating offender services (such as the training and education programs mandated by S136157) in downtown when fewer and fewer potential residences for ex- felons are available could lead to a detrimental outcome for all stakeholders. With the influx of funds for SB6157 programs and a new source of federal grants through the Second Chance Bill, we anticipate that many of downtown's social service providers will be able to expand their programs. However, the question of where to house former convicts will remain. Also, due consideration must be given to the admittedly fragile state of downtown's recent economic turn around. It has attracted significant investment in recent years, thanks in part to initiatives taken by eastern Washington's legislators, but the foundation for its long -term sustainability is still being built. The public's perception of a safe and friendly downtown is an important contributor to that turnaround. In closing, I greatly appreciate your efforts to keep the dialogue open between state and local agencies, social service providers and the business community. We will continue to look for creative solutions to the ongoing affordable housing shortfall with community safety and safe housing as one of the central considerations as we move forward with this issue. Best regards, Marty Dickinson P 509.456.0580 € 509.747.3127 211 N. WALL ST. STE. 300 SPOKANE WASHINGTON 99201 downtown spokane.net ar,G Marty Dickinson From: Andrew Rolwes Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 1:28 PM To: Marty Dickinson Subject: Offender Re -entry, Senator Brown Marty, Here's Sen. B's take on Offender Re -entry from the state Democratic Caucus web page: Offender re- entry. To curb recidivism and increase public safety, we passed a comprehensive offender re -entry bill, which, among other things, would: • Fund increased incarceration costs, community transition coordination networks, individual re- entry plans and expanded evidence -based treatment services ($25 million); • Fund juvenile evidence -based treatment services ($14 million); • Require the Department of Corrections (DOC) to provide educational programs and vocational training during incarceration; • Create pilot programs for offender housing; • Create a community transition coordination network pilot program to assist, counties in community re -entry efforts and encourage collaboration between local government and DOC efforts to supervise offenders; and • Require an offender under community supervision who gets arrested to be confined until there is a DOC hearing or formal charge by the prosecutor. An offender must, with certain exceptions, return to total confinement in a state correctional facility and serve up to the remaining portion of the sentence if he or she is found to have committed a violation of supervision. ROWNTOWN 3 I' 0 K A II E Andrew Rolwes Phone: (509) 456 -0580 x109 Public Policy ,& Parking Manager Fax: (509) 747 -3127 Downtown Spokane Partnership Business Improvement District 211 N. Wall St., Suite 300 E -mail: ARolwes(a)DowntownSpokane.net Spokane, WA 99201 Web Site: www.DowhtownSpokane.net 10/8/2007 o p�4 N 0 �9d 1889 a0Y STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY, TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 128 —10th Avenue SW • PO Box 42525. Olympia, Washington 98504 -2525 • (360) 725 -4000 July 18, 2007 TO: Housing and Service Providers for Offender Re- entry:Programs FROM: Kathy Giglio Program Manager RE: Offender Housing Pilot Program In 2007, the Washington State legislature passed a bill (ESSB 6157) targeted at re -entry planning for offenders being released from correctional facilities. The bill's intent is to support evidence- based programming for offenders and focus on facilitating their successful re -entry into the community. The Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) is authorized to develop offender housing pilot programs in a minimum of two eligible counties (Snohomish, King, Pierce, Yakima, Clark, and Spokane). In addition to direct providers, CTED is interested in organizations that may serve as lead agencies that could subcontract with other providers. Following are components of the legislation that will direct our overall work: 1) The pilot program must be one of the following: a unit of local government, local housing authority, regional support network, non - profit, federally recognized Indian tribe in the state of Washington. 2) The pilot program must be operated in collaboration with the community justice center existing in the location of the pilot site. 3) The pilot program will offer transitional supportive housing itself or in partnership with community based organizations that include individual support, life skills training and mentoring available on an ongoing basis. 4) In providing assistance, priority will be given to offenders who are designated as high risk, high needs, or individuals determined to not have a viable release plan by the Department of Corrections (DOC). 5) Housing and services may be provided for a.period of time not to exceed twelve months. While CTED develops this new program, we would like to hear from potential applicants about their interest in serving as a pilot project. Please submit the attached form by August 6. The information from these responses will help guide our work in designing the program. E -mail the completed form to: Kathy Giglio, at kathyg@cted.wa,gov . Program Guidelines and a competitive Request for Proposals (RFP) will be made available in mid - September and sites selected by mid - November. Contracts will begin as soon as possible after providers are approved. Please check the CTED webpage at http: / /www.cted.wa.gov /site /1041 /default.aspx for program updates or information as it becomes available. You can also email Kathy Giglio at kathyg@cted.wa.gov or reach her by phone at 360/725 -2939. Offender Housing Program Information Agency Name: Street Address: City, State, ZIP: Contact Person: Phone: E -mail: Organization Type (select one): ❑ Housing Authority ❑ Local Government ❑ Regional Support Network ❑ Nonprofit ❑ Federally recognized tribe ❑ Other, please describe: How many years of experience in providing rental assistance program, Section 8, or operating a housing program for ex- offender populations? Interest in (check all that apply): ❑ Providing scattered site tenant based rental assistance program ❑ Operating facility based rental assistance program ❑ Serving as a lead agency (administering contract with CTED and subcontracting with local providers) ❑ Other, please explain: Type of offender housing units proposed: ❑ Residential home setting with private or shared rooms ❑ Apartment/s Number of homes Average number of ex- offenders served monthly Number of units Average number of ex- offenders served monthly Description of supportive services offered with housing assistance: Description of relationship with community service providers: Description of relationship with DOC Community Corrections staff: HOUSE BILL REPORT HB 1147 As Reported by House Committee On: Criminal Justice & Corrections Title: An act relating to protecting communities from sex offenders through the establishment of community protection zones. Brief, Description: Protecting communities from sex offenders through the establishment of community rotection zones. Sponsors: Representatives. Clements, O'Brien, Skinner, Woods, Pearson, Simpson, Lovick, Tom and B. Sullivan. Brief History: Criminal Justice & Corrections: 1/28/05, 2/22/05 [DPS]. Brief Summary of Substitute Bill • Establishes community protection zones around schools. • Prohibits certain sex offenders from living in the zones. HOUSE COMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE & CORRECTIONS Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 7 members: Representatives O'Brien, Chair; Darneille, Vice Chair ;Pearson, Ranking'Minority Member; Ahern, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Kagi, Kirby and Strow. Staff: Jim Morishima (786 -7191) and Yvonne Walker (786- 7841). Background: An offender convicted of more than one "two strikes" sex offense will be sentenced for life in prison without the possibility of parole. Two strikes sex offenses include: • rape in the first and second degrees; • rape of a child in the first and second degrees; • child molestation in the first degree; • indecent .liberties by forcible compulsion; and • the following crimes when committed with sexual motivation: • murder in the first and second degrees; • homicide by abuse; • kidnapping in the first and second degrees; • assault in the first and second degrees; • assault of a child in the first degree; and • burglary in the first degree. An offender who commits a first "two strikes" sex offense will be sentenced to a "determinate plus" sentence. Such an offender will receive a minimum term and a maximum term. The minimum term is generally equal to the offender's standard range sentence. The maximum term is the statutory maximum term for the crime: life for class A felonies, 10 years for class B felonies, and five years for class C felonies. The offender will be evaluated by the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board after the expiration of his or her minimum term and must be released unless he or she is likelier than not to commit a predatory sex offense. If the offender is released, he or she will be on community custody for the remainder of his or her maximum term. The terms for the community custody must include conditions. such as reporting to a community corrections officer and obtaining residence approval from the Department of Corrections (DOC). Summary of Substitute Bill: Community protection zones are established around public and private schools: The zones have a radius of 880 feet around the schools. The court must prohibit an offender who is convicted of a first "two strikes" sex offense against a minor victim from residing in a community protection zone while on community custody. In addition, the DOC may not approve a residence location for such offenders if the proposed residence is in a community protection zone. The DOC must reject a residence location if the proposed residence is within. 880 feet of schools; child .. care centers, playgrounds, or other grounds or facilities where children of similar age or circumstance as a previous victim are present who the department determines may be put at substantial risk of harm by the sex offender's residence at that location. Law enforcement agencies and the DOC are immune from civil liability for damages from any discretionary decisions made if they make a good faith effort to comply with the act. Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill: Provisions are deleted that: (1) increased the penalty for failing to register for certain sex offenders who live in community protection zones; (2) required the sheriff to notify schools when certain sex offenders move into community protection zones; and (3) required school districts to conduct public hearings regarding adopting a parental notification policy. The substitute bill establishes community protection zones around schools and prohibits certain sex offenders from living within those zones. The DOC must reject a residence location if the proposed residence is within 880 feet of schools, child care centers, playgrounds, or other grounds or facilities where children of similar age or circumstance as a previous victim are present who the department determines may be put at substantial risk of harm by the sex offender's residence at that location. A provision is added that makes law enforcement agencies and the DOC immune from civil liability for damages from any discretionary decisions made if they make a good faith effort to comply with the act. Appropriation: None. Fiscal Note: Available. Effective Date of Substitute Bill: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of session in which the bill is passed. Testimony For: Last year in the Selah area, a level III sex offender moved in next to a school. This offender would wear very little clothes and would parade around in front of children. There was a 90 percent chance that the offender would re- offend again. It took seven months to draft this piece of legislation which establishes protection zones. This bill only deals with the worst of the worst that have committed egregious crimes against children. The purpose of this bill is to deal with the general safety of children within a two -block radius of schools. The purpose is not to create an unfunded mandate or a burden on anyone. It invests the. power in the local school boards. Since one of the major obligations of the school district is to provide safety for children that attend their schools. Washington has no legislation that prohibits a level III sex offender from living near schools. It is a parent's nightmare to receive a notice that a sex offender is living near a school. Washington needs a law in place to ensure parents that their children can feel safe walking to and from their schools without a sex offender living in their direct path to that school. Our children deserve the chance to grow up safely while they are in our care. (Concerns) Out of the 18,500 sex offenders registered in this state, less than 16 percent of them.are under the supervision of the DOC. This bill would only impact those offenders under supervision and would not affect those sex offenders living without supervision as in the Selah case. The DOC already has the authority to prevent offenders from living within the close proximity of schools, daycare centers, and other public places. The bill will not unilaterally protect child victims. Studies have shown that sex offenders who do reoffend in schools are those that are traveling to those places and not ones living close to schools. Sex offenders do not re- offend in their own communities, they actually travel to other communities where they are unknown. There are several other concerns with this bill. Sex offender notification should be a law enforcement responsibility and not a school responsibility. Charter schools could continuously be created and as a result sex offenders could be driven underground or out into the rural communities. There also are liability issues both with the expansion of the community protection zones created by schools and the responsibilities of the law enforcement agencies to notify the community. The big concern of this bill is that it creates a false sense of security. It is time that we start thinking about where sex offenders should go and not where they should not be going. Testimony Against: There are constitutional concerns with living restrictions placed on offenders that are no longer under the custody of the DOC. The process by which community protections zones could be expanded is also a concern. In addition, the bill is based upon crimes and not sex offender levels. A person could be convicted of a crime but their assigned sex offender level could be much lower. The use of the term predator is flawed. Most offenders offend against people that they know. Predators offend against people that they do not know. The bill is very vague regarding how a community protection zone is actually defined. It can start off at two blocks and then it may be extended indefinitely. There are no perimeters or borders for community protection zones. There are many sex.offenders that cannot live in certain areas already because the renter or family member can lose his or her lease. What ends up happening is that sex offenders will register as a transient with the police station and then go back and live in these same areas that they were previously prohibited from. Persons Testifying: (In support) Representative Clements, prime sponsor; Penny Pitman; Pearl Mandee; Shelly Grahman;. and Velma Chidson. (Concerns) Victoria Roberts, Department of Corrections; Suzanne Brown = McBride, Washington Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs; James McMahan, Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs; and Dan Steele, Washington State School Director's Association. (Opposed) Michael Kahrs, Washington Defenders Association and Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; and Keith Barnes, Pierce County Sheriffs Department. Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying: None. 't HOUSE BILL REPORT HB 1147 As Reported by House Committee On: Criminal Justice & Corrections Title: An act relating to protecting communities from sex offenders through the establishment of community protection zones. Brief Description: Protecting communities from sex offenders through the establishment of community protection zones. Sponsors: Representatives Clements, O'Brien, Skinner, Woods, Pearson, Simpson, Lovick, Tom and B. Sullivan. Brief History: uriminai Justice & uorrectlons: ii225 /UJ, 2/22/U-,) Brief Summary of Substitute Bill • Establishes community protection zones around schools. • Prohibits certain sex offenders from living in the zones. HOUSE COMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE & CORRECTIONS Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 7 members: Representatives O'Brien, Chair; Darneille, Vice Chair; Pearson, Ranking Minority Member; Ahern, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Kagi, Kirby and Strow. Staff: Jim Morishima (786 -7191) and Yvonne Walker (786- 7841). Background: An offender convicted of more than one "two strikes" sex offense will be sentenced for life in prison without the possibility of parole. Two strikes sex offenses include: • rape in the first and second degrees; • rape of a child in the first and second degrees; • child molestation in the first degree; • indecent liberties by forcible compulsion; and • the following crimes when committed with sexual motivation: • murder in the first and second degrees; • homicide by abuse; kidnapping in the first and second degrees; • assault in the first and second degrees; Eton State Coalition for the Homeless October 25, 2007 Tammy Fellin Association of Washington Cities 1076 Franklin St. SE Olympia, WA 98501 Dear Ms. Fellin, Thank you for the opportunity to work with.the Association of Washington Cities (AWC) Sex - Offender Residency Restriction (6325) Workgroup. This is a very difficult subject and we appreciate your work on the issue. The Washington State Coalition for the Homeless (WSCH) understands and appreciates the concern of the AWC regarding homeless shelter resident safety when sex offenders are residing in shelters. However, we feel that a recommendation to the .Legislature regulating this population's use of shelters is highly problematic, and undermines the. effective precautions individual shelter providers are currently taking to, protect all of their residents. Data As of October 2, 2007, there were 636 homeless, registered sex offenders in Washington.' The 2007 point in time: count of homeless people found 20,045 homeless people surviving in Washington State. 2 Sex offenders make up only approximately. 3.17% of Washington's homeless population. While no empirical data exists to our knowledge, anecdotal evidence suggests that cases where sex offenders register as homeless to avoid monitoring are extremely rare. In addition, according to the Washington State Department of Corrections, sex offenders are the least likely of all offender populations to re- offend. Factors Contributing to Homelessness There are numerous factors that contribute to the homelessness of re- entering sex offenders. According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness, 10% of offenders were homeless before incarceration. This number is even higher, about 20 %, for mentally ill offenders. ' Washington State Sex Offender Information Center: http: / /ml.waspc.org /index.aspx 2 The Washington State Point in Time Count of Homeless People counts all people living in homeless shelters, transitional and other homeless housing, and counts as many people as possible who are living outside. Unfortunately, it is impossible to know the exact number of homeless people in Washington State, but this count does give us a conservative estimate. WSCH — PO Box 14461 — Tumwater, WA 98511 (360) 357 -6990 - wsch_info@comcast.net — www.endhomelessnesswa.org Even if a sex offender had stable housing prior to incarceration, the vast majority of landlords, and all publicly funded housing authorities do not accept any convicted* felon's as tenants. Many employers will not hire convicted felons. No income means they could not afford an apartment even if they found a landlord who would rent to them. If the sex offender is dealing with addiction or mental illness, then they are not prepared to live independently. Many of the few places that will house sex offenders require them to be clean and sober. Access to mental health services is often limited— assuming the sex offender knew he or she needed those services and was seeking them. Offenders in Washington State are released with $40, no usable identification, no transportation, few life skills, low levels of literacy and often, no plan for a successful re- entry. Unless the sex offender has a healthy support network in place and a realistic plan for re- entering society, they will fail. It is impossible to seek housing, employment and stability from under a bridge. When faced with the impossible challenge of creating a new life under these conditions, offenders return to what they know, and often end up back in prison. Current Practices There is currently no statewide policy regarding sex offenders' use of homeless shelters. Each homeless shelter decides whether or not they will accept sex offenders. Based on a random survey of homeless shelter providers, some accept Level 1 Sex Offenders, and some will accept both Levels 1 and 2. None of the providers I spoke with would accept Level 3 Sex Offenders. There are no homeless shelters that will accept any sex offender if women and or children are housed in the same facility. Shelters that accept sex offenders require them to declare their sex offender status. However, shelters do not currently notify other residents when a sex offender is living in their midst. To date, no problems with this practice have been reported. Homeless shelter providers do protect all of their residents by taking universal precautions much like they do to address the possibility of residents having HIV /AIDS. Providers develop and implement policies and procedures protecting shelter residents from exposure, while also protecting the privacy of each resident. No Reported Problems Shelter providers have been successful with their self-imposed regulations. No major problems with housing se I x offenders have been reported. Shelter providers hope to maintain their autonomy in this regard given the effectiveness of the policies and procedures they currently have in place. WSCH — PO Box 14461 — Tumwater, WA 98511 (360) 357 -6990 -- wsch_info@comcast.net -- www.endhomelessnesswa.org Unintended Consequences of Additional Reporting Requirements Requiring shelter providers to identify sex offenders staying in their facilities could create some very negative, unintended consequences. Housing for sex offenders is very scarce. This additional reporting requirement will likely result in increased stigma and decreased safety of sex offenders seeking emergency housing. It is counterproductive to further decrease safe housing options available to sex offenders. This recommendation will make shelters responsible for reporting sex - offenders, something that law enforcement has always been responsible for. Finally, it arbitrarily targets homeless shelters as opposed to all temporary housing establishments such as motels and hotels where homeless people, especially offenders, reside. To be fair, this requirement would have to include all temporary housing establishments. Solutions We understand that the AWC Sex Offender Residency Restriction Workgroup has not been able to come to a consensus regarding statewide sex offender residency restrictions. However, we hope you will continue to address this issue with us and with all stakeholders involved. To that end, WSCH recommends that the AWC, relevant agencies within the State of Washington, the WSCH and other interested parties work together to create policies designating where sex offenders can live. As you know, stable housing is a key factor in law enforcement's ability to effectively monitor all offenders, especially sex offenders. Increasing the housing options available to sex offenders (and all offenders) will significantly reduce recidivism and increase. public safety. In order to end homelessness in Washington State, as mandated by HB 2163 in 2005, policy change is necessary to increase safety and provide adequate housing for all homeless people, including sex offenders. WSCH is committed to collaborating with all stakeholders to create sufficient and adequate housing for this population. Thank you for your attention in this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions or for more information. The Board of WSCH and I look forward to working with you to find a solution. Sincerely, Mia Navarro Wells Executive Director WSCH ~ PO Box 14461 — Tumwater, WA 98511 (360) 357 -6990 — wsch_info@comcast.net — www.endhomelessnesswa.org AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE I r' NATIONAL HOUSING TRUST FUND INDUSTRY NEWS National Housing Trust Fund Bill Introduced egislation to establish a National Affordable Housing Trust Fund has been intro- duced in the House of Representatives, with the goal of producing, rehabilitating, and preserv- ing 1.5 million housing units over the next 10 years. The bill (H.R. 2895) would allocate between $800 million and $1 billion annually to local communities (60 per- cent) and states (40 percent). The fund can be used to build, rehabilitate, and preserve affordable rental housing and to provide downpayment and closing cost assistance for first -time home buyers. Under the proposal, states and local- ities would be required to make trust fund grants to qualified entities, including for - profits, nonprofits, agencies, and faith - based organizations, that propose afford- able housing projects designed to meet the highest - priority housing needs in their jurisdictions. -Me growing shortage of affordable housing is one of the most serious social and economic problems facing our coun- try, said Rep. Barney Frank (D- Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, in a statement_ "Given our severely constrained fiscal realities, we are today doing the best we can to address this— creating a low- income housing trust fund that will be paid for in ways that do not draw from federal tax rev- enues." The legislation is a bi- partisan effort with several other House members join- ing Frank in introducing the bill. The fund would be funded by differ- ent sources, including the proposed Government Sponsored Enterprises' Affordable Housing Fund (H.R. 1427), which recently passed in the House. Affordable housing - advocates Praised the introduction of the new bill. "The introduction of the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act of 2007 is a signal of hope for the millions of families of low -wage earners and elderly or disabled people on fixed incomes who cannot afford even the most modest rental homes," said Sheila Crowley, presi- dent of the National Low Income Housing Coalition. "With this bill, new resources will be dedicated to expand the supply of rental homes that the lowest - income people can afford More information can be found at www.nhtEorg. LIHTC market remains tentative Should developers with a reservation of low - income housing tax credits (LEI-iTCs) wait for prices to increase before selling? That was one of the questions posed to a panel of equity experts at the National Council of State Housing Agencies (NCSHA) 2007 Housing Credit Conference in San Francisco. If a deal works with existing rates, a developer should do it, said Jeffrey Donahue, president and CEO of Enterprise Community Partners, Inc. No one knows where prices will go in the future, he said.. During the discussion moderated by Richard Goldstein, a partner at Nixon Peabody, LLC, speakers said the LIHTC market has stabilized in recent months but remains tentative. It wouldn't take much for the market to get skittish, warned a speaker. Meeting rural needs In another session, 'The Rural Challenge,' Panelists discussed ways to develop affordable housing in rural com- munities. More developers should take advan- tage of the under - utilized U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development (RD) Sec. 538 program, said Michael Steininger, director of the multifamily housing processing division 8 AFFORDABLE HOUSING FINANCE - AUGUST 2007 r� v+ -!off ,9 for RD. The program is compatible with LIHTCs. One -third of all rural renters are `cost - overburdened; said Lowell Barron II, president of The Vantage Group, an affordable housing development firm based in Fyffe, Ala. That means they are Paying more than 30 percent of their income for rent and utilities. "The growing shortage of affordable housing is one of the most serious social and economic problems facing our country." -Rep. Barney Frank (D- Mass.) Barron said ' there is a bias against rural housing. People just find it hard to believe that housing could not be afford- able in parts of the country where the cost of living is lower than in urban areas. A speaker noted that rural develop- ments tend to be smaller in size than those found in urban areas. It may also be necessary to have scattered -site proper- ties. For example, a rural community might not have a demand for a 100 -unit development, but might need 15 units. Twenty miles away, another rural town needs 10 units. So it might not be practi- cal to build one affordable development with many units. "Having all the sites in the same county or municipality would be cheaper to operate in terms of management; said Sherry Bossie, senior director of multi- family development for the West Virginia Housing Development Fund. "It's impor- tant to make sure you're building to the market so you can cover your costs. Find your target rent and work backwards." ■ MEMORANDUM Date: June 8, 2007 To: Christine Barada, Director, Community Services Department and Housing and Community Development Department From: Tim Crowley, Manager, Housing and Community Development.Department Subject: Spokane County Affordable Housing Trust Fund (SHB 2060) I. Legislative Back Ground 1. The Washington State Legislature passed Substitute Housing Bill 2060 (SHB 2060) during the 57`h Legislative Session and Governor Locke signed the bill on April 22, 2002. 2. On April 18, 2002 Housing & Community Development Department Director presented the BoCC, CEO, and Spokane County Auditor (Vicky Dalton) with a summary of the legislation and a request that the Housing & Community Development Department receive authorization to administer, plan and implement draft policies and procedures in allocating surcharge fee resources toward meeting identified high priority affordable housing needs within Spokane County, including the cities and towns. 3. The BoCC, under Resolution 2- 0438-, approved on April 30, 2002 appointed the department to administer the document recording fee surcharge funds pursuant to the -'` provisions of the. SHB 2060). The department Director was authorized to develop plans for allocating funds, budgets, inter local cooperation agreements with the cities and towns (required), and submit plans-and policies to the BoCC for their approval. 4. On February 4, 200, under Resolution 3 -0112, the BoCC approved establishing a special revenue fund (Fund #123), titled "Spokane County Housing Trust Fund," to be effective March 1, 2003, in order to establish the control and accountability for the inflow and outflow of resources received and disbursed. 5. The Director was authorized to proceed with implementing policies, inter local agreements, and establish an ad hoc committee (composed of representatives of City of Spokane, Spokane Valley, SLIHC, and a non - profit service agency), pursuant to Resolution 3 -0410, on April 22, 2003. II. Interim Program Elements (3 -years as Interim Program) • Basic Program Goals — Maintain flexibility and keep administration costs low • Development of Annual Funding Guidelines and Application • Established Annual Funding Cycle • Established Internal Application Review • Establish Ad Hoc Committee Roles/Responsibilities • Established Annual Citizen's Participation and Public Reporting • Refine coordination with local plans and programs • Annual Reporting of activities to BoCC/Mayors III. Recommendations 1. Maintain the current Request for Proposal funding timeline and Guidelines. 2. Create a permanent program by: • Expand the committee appointments by BoCC • Increase committee requirements (technical) • Develop Committee By -laws • Look at possibilities to capitalize, manage the fund • Continue to maximize flexibility of funds • Strengthen coordination with local funding resources.. i.e. 2163, CDBG, mental health excise tax; HOME IV. Eligible 2060 Activities (condensed version) 1. Acquisition, new construction, or rehabilitation of housing projects or units .within housing projects; 2.;.. Supporting building operation and maintenance costs of housing projects or units within housing projects;. . 3. Rental assistance vouchers for housing projects or units within housing projects. Must be administered by a local public housing authority; and 4. Operating costs for emergency shelters and licensed overnight youth shelters. Projects and Activities Funded with Affordable Housing Trust Fund (SHB 2060) 1) 2) 3) . 4) .5) 6) Project/Program Name Short Description of project and characteristics of Number of Number of Capital Operating the people being served (100 words or less) beds (it units (if Commitments and applicable) applicable) 7/2001 Maintenance * * through commitments 10/2006. 7/2004 through 10/2007 (2006) Catholic Charities- O &M providing emergency shelter and transitional 18 $68,031 St. Margaret's Shelter housing for. 18 homeless women and their children. 2006 -2007 Serves very low- income. Project funded for 2 years in 2006. (2006) Community . Rehab of apartment building that provides section 8 56 $35,000 Frameworks -New Bryant rental assistance to low and very low- income Arms South households. (2006) Coalition of Provide one time rent deposit for disabled households 38 $28,000 Responsible. Disabled -Rent having difficulty getting into suitable unit due to lack Deposit Assistance of security deposit. Serves low and ve low- income. (2006)East Central Comm. Construction of a 2 story, 25 unit senior housing; 25 $150,000 Org.- Senior Housing complex. Serves 13 seniors at or below 3.00/q AMI and. Complex 18 at or below 50% AMI (2006) Inland'Empire Restructuring of debt for,4 unit building which houses 4 $77,000 Residential Resources- formerly homeless Shelter Plus Care clients most are House of Charity below 30% AMI (2006) Pine Villa Roof replacement/repair and repainting of two 50 $46,947 Associates -Roof buildings of 50 unit apt.,complex. 30 below 30% AMI Replacement and 18 below 50% AMI`will be served. (2006)The Salvation Replace roof at the Family Emergency Center. Serves 18 $75,000 Army -Roof Replacement low, very low and extremely low- income homeless persons. (2006)Spokane Housing Acquisition of land located in Medical Lake to. build 36 36 $204,000 Ventures -Land Acquisition units of affordable housing. 10, units will serve. those at or below 30 %, 16 at or below 50% and 10 at or below 60% of AMI. (2006) Spokane O &M for 22 unit apartment complex which 10 are 22 $23,233 Neighborhood Action targeted to serve those below. 30% AMI and 12 are_ for Programs -O &M those at or below 50% AMI. Project funded for 3 years Alexandria Apt. Complex in 2006.., 2006 -2008 CA\Documents and Settings \teresab\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLKBF\2060 County Report 2004 - 2006.doc (2006) Spokane Rehab of apartment in 4 unit building that serves very 1 $14,675 Neighborhood Action low income Chronically Mentally III clients which was, Programs- Apartment severely damaged by a tenant. Rehab (2006) Spokane Partners Rehab of apartment building. This funding will help $225,000 LLC -New Madison create 20 units with 10 units targeting those at 30% and Apartment Rehab 10 to those at 50% AMI or below. 5 will be fully ADA accessible. (2006) Youth Family Adult Installation of a security system and possibly upgrade a . $8,000 Connections- Security fire detection system for the Crisis Residential Center. System This building houses runaway and homeless outh. (2006) YWCA -O &M of O &M for Confidential Safe shelter which provides 40 $26,300 Safe Shelter assistance to individuals who are victims of domestic violence will serve 475 individuals who are at or below 30% AMI and 25 at or below 50% AMI. (2006) YWCA- Capital Capital. Improvements for Confidential Safe shelter 40 $19,950 Improvements for Safe which provides assistance to individuals who are Shelter victims of domestic violence will serve 475 individuals are at or below 30% AMI and 25 at or below 50 %. , AMI. (2005) Transitions- O&M for transitional living center that serves 35 16 $68,000 Transitional Living Center homeless women with children. Project funded for 2005 -2007 . three years in 2005. (2005) Habitat for Development of six triplex. homeownership units with 6 $88,500 Humanity - Single Family two units targeted to very low and extremely low Residence Construction income disabled households. (2005) RenCorp. LLC -The Rehab to replace roof, install exterior lighting and 16 $43,200 Gables on Broadway replace interior staircases. Serves 34 low and very low - income. (2005) Ten Talents — Lloyd Rehab of apartments after building fire. Serves 22 28 $400,000 Apartments extremely low and 6 low- income households. (2005) Salvation Army- Operations and Maintenance of Emergency Shelter. 17 $60,000 Emergency Safe Center Serves 197 low and very low - income homeless per 2005 -2007 year. Project funded for three years in 2005. (2005) Salvation Army- Transitional housing O &M for homeless households 30 $20,000 Transitional Housing with children. Serves 225 low -and 225 very low - income persons per year. C:\Documents and Settings \teresab\Local Settingffemporary Internet Files \OLKBF\2060 County Report 2004 - 2006.doc (2005) Salvation Army- . Construction of the Family Emergency SAFE Center. $100,000 SAFE Center Serves 197 homeless persons per year. (2005) Spokane Housing O &M for apartment building that houses those with 26 $43,500 Ventures - Catherine Disabilities and' Chronic Mental Illness. Serves 68 low - Johnson Court Apts. 2005- to -very low- income including large families. Project 2007 funded for 3 years in 2005. (2005) Spokane Housing Rehabilitation for apartment building that houses 26 $46,000 Ventures- Catherine Disabled/Chronic Mental Illness. Serves 68 low -to- Johnson Court Apts. very low- income including lar a families: (2005) Spokane Housing Rehab 33 units serving 70 low -to -very low- income 33 $162,650 Ventures - Triplex including homeless with chronic mental illness and chemical de endenc . (2005) Spokane Low Web based housing locator program that will connect $19,000 Income Housing people seeking housing with available affordable Consortium - Affordable housing. To serve 2,250 people per year. Housing Locator Program (2005) SNAP - Collins Roof replacement for Multi - family transitional housing 39 $31,500 Apartments apartment building for highly vulnerable low- income population with few housing options. (2005) SNAP - Resident O &M for 43 unit apartments that serve low to very 43 $20,000 Court Apartments low- income mentally ill and disabled persons (2005) Catholic Charities- O &M for the emergency winter sleeping program 108 $80,000 House of Charity 2005 - which serves homeless men and women. Project 2006 funded 2 years in 2005. (2004) Catholic Charities- O &M for the emergency winter sleeping program 108 $40,000 House of Charity which serves homeless men and women. (2004) Guse Summit View O &M costs* for apartment building that houses low- 27 $50,000 Apartments-O&M income single parent families at or below 50% AMI. (2004) Habitat for Construction of one duplex unit to serve families with 2 $106,000 Humanity.- Duplex Unit incomes at or below 50% AMI. Construction (2004)Miryam's House of O &M. for transitional living center for homeless 10 $45,000 —Transition. women and children. (2004) NRF (Community Construction of homeownership units for disabled 2 $22,500 Frameworks) and Coalition persons considered extremely low- income. of Responsible Disabled - Homestarts CADocuments and Settings \teresab\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLKBF\2060 County Report 2004 - 2006.doc (2004) N.E. WA. Housing Housing vouchers for non - violent drug offenders in 10 $146,000 Solutions (SHA) -Drug and drug free neighborhoods that have policies regarding Family Court illegal drug use. (2004)Salem Arms Rehab and repair of fire damaged apartment building 8 $8,450 Apartments- Rehabilitation for eight very low- income mentally ill homeless individuals. (2004) Salem Arms O &M of apartment building for eight very low - income 8 $32,502 Apartments- O &M mentally ill homeless individuals. (2004)Spokane Housing Urgent health and safety repairs. Serves very low 25 $41,500 Ventures -Casas Salvadas income families and individuals with disabilities. Apts. (2004) SNAP - Collins O &M for multi - family transitional housing apartments 39 $50,000 Apartments for highly vulnerable low- income population with few housing options. (2004), SNAP - Windsor Multi - family rehab project that includes exterior '8 $40,000 Apartments lighting, railings, rain gutters, and parking lot upgrades. Serves 24 people. (2004) Volunteers of O &M Emergency Shelter for 28 homeless women in 28 $30,000 America -Hope House the downtown area of Spokane. Project funded for 3 2004 -2006 years in 2004. . (2004) YFA Connections- O &M Emergency Shelter and counseling services for 13 $50,000 Crisis Residential Center at risk youth. Serves 13. (2004) YWCA- O &M for Emergency Shelter that serves very low- 40 $45,000 Alternatives to Domestic income women and children that are .victims of Violence 20.04 -2006 domestic violence. Project funded for 3 years in 2004. TOTAL .IAAA T 377 687 $1,945,872 $944,566 cvvw rroiect rerioa is from September 1, 2004. to AUgUSt 11, 2005 2005 Project Period is from January 1,:2006 to December 31, 2006 2006 Project Period is from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007 • Beds and units supported by vouchers should be expressed in "Annual Bed Equivalencies," meaning the number of beds supported by the vouchers over the course of a year C:\Documents and Settings\teresab\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLKBF\2060 County Report 2004 - 2006.doc Page 1 of 3 Valerie Jackson From: Marty Dickinson Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 200710 :12 PM To: Valerie Jackson Subject: FW: Summary of the NAHTF Pls print for me From: Ashe, Susan ;[mailto:SAshe @SpokaneCity.org] Sent: Wed 8/8/2007 11:07 AM To: Marty Dickinson; Brum, Teresa Subject: Summary of the NAHTF Here is something that your task force may consider recommending to the Mayor to support to Congress this year as part of your long- term „policy recommendations. My understanding from the National League of Cities is that the U.S. House passed'H.R. 2895 out of committee and that the full House will consider the bill this September. Susan Susan Ashe Director of Legislative & Public Affairs City of Spokane (509) 625 -6759 sashe spokaneci .or Summary of National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act of 2007_. June 26, 2007 THE NATIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND BILL Prepared by the House Financial Services :Committee Funding of the Trust Fund: The goal of the Trust Fund is to construct, rehabilitate, and preserve 1,500,000 units of housing over the next 10 years. The bill seeks to accomplish this with funding from the proposed GSE Affordable Housing Fund (H.R. 1427.), FHA savings that should result from the enactment of the Expanding American Homeownership Act (HR 1852), and any other sources of funds. .' Formula under the Trust Fund: 60% of monies will go to participating local jurisdictions and 40% to states, Indian Tribes and insular areas. A 1% minimum amount floor is 8/9/2007 Page 2 of 3 provided for each state. A proportionate amount must go to rural areas. If the total amount available in any year is less than $2 billion, there is a $1 million minimum funding threshold for local jurisdictions. Targeting under the Trust Fund: All Trust Fund monies must be used for low income families (below 80% of median income). At least 75% of funds must go to extremely low- income families (below 30% of median income). At least 30% of funds must go to families with incomes below the SSI income limit. Eligible Recipients of Trust Fund Monies: States and participating local jurisdictions are required to make Trust Fund grants to eligible recipients, which can be any organization, agency, or other entity, including for - profits, nonprofits, and faith -based organizations, that have demonstrated the experience and the capacity to carry out the proposed Trust Fund activity. Eligible Uses of Trust Fund Monies: The bill would allow Trust Fund monies for construction, rehabilitation, acquisition, preservation incentives (including for manufactured housing and community land trusts) and up to 12 months of project based rental assistance. Funds may be used for both rental housing that is affordable and for down payment and closing cost assistance by first time homebuyers. Prohibited Uses: The bill includes prohibitions against any funds being used for administrative costs or expenses, political activities, advocacy, lobbying, counseling, travel expenses, and preparation of or advice on tax returns. In addition there is a. requirement that grantee develop systems to ensure program compliance, and require annual state fund use reports, and authority for HUD to impose penalties on states that do not comply with requirements, including requiring states and grantees to reimburse' misused funds. Matching Requirements of the Trust Fund: For every $2 of Trust Fund monies,. the bill requires matching funds of $1 of state, local and private resources or for.every $1 of Trust. Fund monies, $1 in matching funds from federal sources. .It allows for revenue committed by a jurisdiction to a Trust Fund - assisted project to provide services for residents to qualify as matching funds. It also provides for a reduced match where a zoning variance or other waiver of regulatory barriers was required to site Trust Fund - assisted housing. National Low Income,Housing Coalition (NLIHC) 727 15th Street NW, 6th Floor Washington, D.C. 20005 202/662 -1530 1 Fax 202/393 -1973 contact I site map I terms of use I privacy statement ©2006 National Low Income Housing Coalition. Michael Hoover Legislative & Public Affairs Intern City of Spokane (509) 625 6758 8/9/2007 .0 Marty Dickinson (r From: Andrew Rolwes Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:40 AM To: Marty Dickinson Subject: H.R.2895 National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act of 2007 Marty, The H of R passed the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act of 2007 on the 10th of October. bill was sponsored by Barney Frank of Mass. and passed mostly on partisan lines. Totals & Party Breakdown Total Democrat Republican Independent Ayes: 264 (61 %) 223 41 0 Nays: 148 (34 %) 0 148 0 No Vote: 19 (4 %) 8 11 0 Required: Simple Majority of 412 votes Washington Aye WA -1 Inslee. Jay [D] -'y Aye WA -2 Larsen, Rick [D] Aye WA -3 Baird. Brian [D] Nay WA -4 Hastings. Doc [R] Nay WA -5 McMorris Rodgers C aft _[Rl Aye WA -6 Dicks, Norman [D] Aye WA -7 McDermott. James [D] No Vote WA -8 Reichert, Dave [Rl Aye WA -9 Smith, Adam [D] H.R.2895 National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act of 2007 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House) `SEC. 291. PURPOSES. 'The purposes of this subtitle are -- '(1) to address the national shortage of housing that is affordable to low- income families by creating a permanently appropriated fund, with dedicated sources of funding, to finance C'J ., additional housing activities, without supplanting existing housing appropriations or existing State and local funding for affordable housing, 10/18/2007 1 arc /_ vi /. '(2) to enable rental housing to be built, for families with the greatest economic need, in mixed - income settings and in areas with the greatest economic opportunities; '(3) to promote ownership of one -to -four family owner - occupied housing by low- income families; and '(4) to construct, rehabilitate, and preserve at least 1,500,000 affordable dwelling units over the next decade. 10/18/2007 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TASKFORCE MEDIA /ARTICLES —Cl— . — �_ —� SEARCH 8:09 AM PDT, October 11. 2007 JOBS CARS REAL ESTATE APARTMENTS SHOPPING I WEATHER TRAFFIC HOME MyLATlmes Site Map California /Local Los Angeles Orange County S.F. Valley Ventura County Inland Empire Crime & Courts Education Environment Politics Columns Slogs Bottleneck Blog The Homicide Report Community Papers. Burbank Leader Newport Beach Laguna Beach Huntington Beach Glendale News NEWS California I Local National World Entertainment News Business Sports Politics Opinion Columnists Print Edition Calendarlive Travel West Magazine Home & Garden Health Food L.A. Wheels Books Image Obituaries Crossword, Sudoku All Sections Corrections BUY, SELL & MORE Jobs Cars Real Estate Apartments Personals Deals at Local Store Coupons Newspaper Ads PLACE AN AD LAT Media Group latimes.com MY SETTINGS Sign Up Login Personalized News SITE SERVICES Help Contact Us ® RSS L.A. Times Archives HOME DELIVERY California I Local News L.A., homeless advocates reach deal Email CO I Print a , Text 8 I Single Page on sidewalk sleeping AI S b / LAT WARNING: LAPD Officers Mike Coblentz, left, and Guadalupe "Shep" Ruvalcaba tell 58- year -old Tyrone Victor Valiant that he needs to reduce the sidewalk space taken up by his tent on 6th Street. The homeless can sleep on L.A. streets from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. with certain restrictions. By Steve Hymon and David Zahniser. Los Angeles Times Staff Writers October 11. 2007 Even as Los Angeles officials announced Wednesday that they were settling a lawsuit with advocates for the homeless over a city law that prohibits people from sleeping on sidewalks, downtown Councilwoman Jan Perry vowed to pursue a law that would forbid such camping. . The legal settlement involves a 2003 lawsuit brought by skid row residents who complained they were being arrested for sleeping on sidewalks, despite having nowhere else to go. Under the new deal, the homeless can sleep on sidewalks from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. anywhere in the city as long as they do not block access to doorways or driveways or completely block the sidewalk. If a homeless person blocks an entrance or the sidewalk police first must issue a warning and then give the person time to move. Until now, police were allowed to remove the homeless from sidewalks in neighborhoods outside downtown, although they rarely have done so. Under the settlement's terms, the city can enforce its §, overnight sidewalk sleeping ban only if it builds 1,250 units A& PHOTO GALLERY of supportive housing for the homeless, with half those Skid Row crackdown units downtown. City officials said such action was unlikely to take place for at least three to five years. The lawsuit was brought by six homeless people who alleged that the city's enforcement of the sidewalk sleeping ban was harassment. But the deal drew criticism from downtown business leaders because it allows sidewalk sleeping to continue. isa PHOTO GALLERY "People eat, live, sleep and defecate in the same place on The Fight for skid Row our sidewalks -- what's good about that ?" said Estela Lopez, executive director of the Central City East Assn. �.,. " =�.Si. �� -.a ::r.. , Perry, who represents most of the 50- square -block area R "�,-�= known as skid row, resisted efforts last year to settle the A tole of tw Spydem Behind every Porsche innovation is a legend, R01' odrr to diticcj- 2r ILE it .4 i'1d . POG7SCM6 More California News - Street racing takes on a deadly new form - NBC to bid bye -bye to Burbank - Political funds shouldnt pay for officials' pleasure Subscribe + MyLATlmes to Section • _ -.... _ .. More RSS Readers > Most ie Vwed Most E- mailed Relate Buss: Bryant Isn't untouchable - NBC to bid bye -bye to Burbank - Street racing takes on a deadly new form - They love to do their homework - Illegal hiring crackdown is blocked All most viewed > http: / /www.latimes.com/ news /local /la- me- homeless 11 oct 11,1,6991753.story ?etrack =1 &c... 10/11/2007 Customer Support Subscribe At home on the street El click to enlarge p StMtd�Y „ Related Stories County's homeless Initiative hits skids, heads In a different direction - Homeless man Is set afire: 3teens sought - Bretton admits skid row displacement - Skid row crime drops 35 %, but the program Is faulted Homeless women arraigned in daughter's death A shelter far from the streets In Vegas, all bets off on the homeless - No Skid Row Accord for City, ACLU Sharp Debate on Skid Row Efforts - Appeal of Skid Row Ruling Is Urged Plan Would End Homeless Tent Cites' - Bid to Settle Homeless Suit Causes No Celebration on Skid Row - Attempt to Settle Skid Row Suit Falls A Comer Where L.A. Hits Rock Bottom $70- Million Boost for the Mentally III What the Homeless Need First Homes - Alleged Skid Row Dumping Is Captured on Videotape - A musician of the streets Homeless In the foothills Our city, our duty - No breaks for Skid Row - Not In their backyard - Homeless politics, LA._ style Don't get cocky, kids - Much ado about not much - Street Conversations With the Broken -Down Brigade - Man of the Streets, In Three Suites Stakes Are So High, It's Hard to Walt - From Skid Row to Disney Hall A Ray of Hope for Future Nathaniels - From Skid Row to Disney Hall - Now Comes the Heavy Lifting Former Exec Turns Talents to Aiding Homeless lawsuit The difference this time around, she said, was the provision allowing the homeless to sleep overnight anywhere in the city, not just in skid row. "I felt that whatever applied to this community should apply to all communities in Los Angeles," said Perry, who called the settlement a "decent outcome for now." But Perry said she wants to create a new anti - camping ordinance that could withstand a challenge by the American Civil Liberties Union, which helped argue the case against the ban. Ramona Ripston, executive director of the ACLU of Southern California, said her group would oppose any anti- camping law. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in April 2006 that the city was woefully short of overnight shelter space and said arresting a homeless person for sleeping on the sidewalk was "cruel and unusual punishment" Judges also wrote in their decision that Los Angeles' sidewalk sleeping law was more restrictive than those in most other cities and amounted to criminalizing homelessness:} Both the city and homeless advocates agreed to ask the appeals court to,vaeate its decision. If the court declines the settlement will be negated. Since the 9th Circuit's ruling, the Los Angeles Police Department has been enforcing the ban only during the day. Ripston said the settlement would force the city to build supportive housing where the homeless can receive treatment for problems that led them to live on the streets. "Like all settlements, it's not perfect," Ripston said. "But it's a case that started with a request for shelter beds. We're getting a lot more than we asked for." The council unanimously approved the settlement Tuesday in a closed -door meeting, a move that infuriated downtown business leaders who had followed the issue for years. Carol Schatz, president and chief executive of the Central City Assn., said that the council pursued a "stealth" strategy that would leave downtown to cope with.the brunt of the homeless crisis. "It's impossible to believe that they really wanted our input," said Schatz, whose group represents developers and business interests. For one businessman, the settlement also raises the prospect that the homeless will increasingly spread beyond skid row, bounded by 3rd, 7th, Main and Alameda streets, and begin setting up tents and boxes on sidewalks in front of downtown's increasing number of late -night restaurants, as well as the newly opened Ralphs supermarket and Staples Center. "How would you like people setting up tents in front of your house with no bathroom facilities? Its going to be a health hazard," said Peter Zen, the owner's representative for the Westin Bonaventure Hotel. "And every morning, after they dear out their tents, who's going to clean up after them ?" The LAPD last year increased the number of officers deployed to skid row. Police Chief William J. Bretton said that effort had greatly reduced crime there but also had pushed homeless to other parts of the city. steve. hymon@lafimes.com david.zahniser@latimes.com `,o'r: hir�ne ir,mily proc.:icior.crz;. Ill eve minute clinic http://www.latimes.com/newsAocal/la-me-homelessl l octl 1,1,6991753.story?ctrack= 1&c... 10/11/2007 1.1111 - LVb llllgcjcb Save/Share California and the world. Get The Times from $1.25 a week. Subscribe now. Caught Cheating _ The strangest things happen Former Mexican presidential "On the Street"I View our, readers' photos and share " candidate disqualified from your own at Your Scene. marathon for cheating. Submit your photo now » Ads by Google Check MD for Malpractice Check your doctor for malpractice, sanctions, education and background www.heahhgrades.com Do Something What Do You Fight For? What Do You Stand For? YouTube.com /LlonsForl-amb s Help homeless & orphans Want to help the desperately poor & homeless from around the world? CaringHouseProjeclFoundabon.org Spokane Homeless Shelters Find Homeless Shelters in Spokane. See listings, maps, and more. dexonline.com Homeless Health Care Compare Health Insurance Plans Online - Get Free Quotes & Save. USlnsuranceOnline.com rage Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Times Privacy Policy i Terms of Service I Advertise I Home Delivery I Permissions I Contact Partners: Hoy I KTLA I Careerbuilder.com for jobs I Cars.com for autos I Apartments.com for rentals I ShopLocal I Shopping I FSBO (For Sale By Owner) I Open Houses Boodle.com for Grocery Coupons I Houses for Rent I Recycler for Free Classifieds http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-homelessl l oct 11,1,6991753.story?ctrack =l &c... 10/11/2007 Marty Dickinson From: Marla Oleniacz Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 9:05 AM To: Marty Dickinson Subject: SR: Guest Opinion - Bring barn - raising mindset to housing S00MMNlMRME 1V.00M Guest Opinion Bring barn - raising mindset to housing Jerry Schwab Special to The Spokesman- Review July 24, 2007 A hurricane is about to hit Spokane. I called the Seattle Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) voluntary agency liaison and asked if we might be able to engage the agency in our impending crisis and possibly access some of the FEMA trailers standing empty from the recent catastrophe in the Gulf region. She was very responsive, wonderfully compassionate and understanding, but regretfully had to inform me that Spokane's disaster didn't meet its guidelines. She explained that prior to the Sept. I 1 terrorist attacks, the only disasters that FEMA could respond to were climatic events and that after Sept. 11 there was a new provision for FEMA to respond to terrorist activities. Unfortunately the downtown housing development disaster is not covered under those guidelines. Column 'guidelines To submit a guest column about a local or regional issue, or to request guidelines, please do so by e -mail to editor sspokesman.com or by conventional mail to: Guest Columns Spokesman- Review Opinion page 999 W. Riverside Ave Spokane, WA 99201. The reality in downtown Spokane is that a large number of people are going to become homeless because they are going to lose their housing. The City Council has allocated some funds to help with relocation assistance. Social service agencies are scrambling to scour the community for available rooms. Unfortunately, the truth is that there are not enough rooms in the community to house the number of people who will lose housing. T When I read the commentaries on the crisis, I don't .hear much talk about the reality that homelessness in Spokane is about to skyrocket. Whether one views Chris Batten as a terrorist or as a compassionate developer, his actions and those involved in the gentrification of downtown Spokane are going to force a substantial number of people to hit the streets of Spokane, just like in every other major urban downtown in the nation where each night people bunk down on the sidewalks next to four -star hotels, shops and lofts. People who used to live at Eastern State Hospital or Walla Walla State Penitentiary or who lived at times in their lives in stability and luxury will be seeking refuge under the Interstate 90 viaduct, near the Centennial Trail, under bridges and at the House of Charity, Hope House, City Gate, Union Gospel 7/24/2007 1, rage /_ or Mission, Truth Ministries and other providers. The problem is that nearly all of those agencies are already overwhelmed. The Federal 10 Year Plan. to End Homelessness is no more effective on a national level than the No Child Left Behind debacle. If you gentrify without replacing low- income housing stock, you increase homelessness. The.community needs to do an old - fashioned barn- raising. We need to pull together, roll up our sleeves and develop some immediate living spaces. There are some downtown buildings standing largely empty. Hopefully, bankers can fast -track the financing, and when the churches, carpenters and philanthropists all come together, I think we .could prove that Spokane is near nature and near perfect and not constrained by the limitations of other big cities. I love downtown Spokane and I happen to love loft condominiums. I also have come to know and love many very poor but.very rich downtown residents, who, up until this point, have been largely invisible. I hope that their increasing visibility will be a result of creative community- building and not a physical; emotional and behavioral unraveling and regression. IAL 0OwNTOW ST U K A h E Marla Nunberg- Oleniacz Phone: (509) 456- 0580.x107 Marketing Director Fax: (509) 747 -3127 Downtown Spokane-Partnership Business Improvement District 211 N. Wall St, Suite 300 E -mail: MOleniacz&Downtown. Spokane. net Spokane, WA 99201 Web.Site: www. Downtown. Spokane :net 7/24/2007 HOUSE OF CHARITY lAtestPacific P.O. Box 2253 VA program of Catholic Charities Spokane Spokane, WA 99210 509.624.7821 - August 2007 - "Spokane Housing Crisis" "Preach the Gospel always! If necessary, use words. " - St. Francis of Assisi We should have seen it coming. As I look back on, the gentrification of Downtown, with buildings everywhere being converted to high -end condos, I realize that we in the low -in- come housing community should have foreseen that the old apartment buildings housing our clients would themselves eventually be convert- ed to other uses and become unavailable to the poor. Sadly, none among us was so visionary. Our lack of foresight combined with the recent decision by the owners of two large low- income apartment buildings to sell the buildings and dislocate their vulnerable residents have left Spokane in a "perfect storm" housing crisis. Actually, it is two crises. Let me briefly outline them. The first crisis is the immediate one: within days or weeks, as many as 100 of Spokane's poorest, most vulnerable, and difficult - to-house people could be evicted from their homes in the New Madison and Otis buildings and may be on the street. As though that isn't bad enough, there is virtually no housing in Spokane available for these people. There are several reasons for this. One, obviously, is that the housing simply isn't there. According to Spokane Neighborhood Action Programs (SNAP), there is a vacancy rate of approximately 2% in the lowest range of af- fordable housing in.Spokane currently available. Since 2% is the standing vacancy rate due to turnover, by definition, there is no such housing. Add to this the loss of 50 low- income units with the closure of Downtown's Westminster Square - and the scale of the crisis becomes overwhelm- ing. Another problem is that many of those soon -to -be homeless, particularly from the Otis,, are sex offenders and simply will not be able to find anyplace that will take them. This critical lack of lowest - income housing in Spokane is bad enough by itself, but the situa- tion is dramatically compounded by the facts that several more low- income buildings will soon be sold in the Downtown area and that there is not enough time to create new housing options before more evictions come. While the current circumstance is dire, it has been mitigated substantially by the tremen- dous collaborative work of a number of hous- ing and other. social service agencies and the City Council, which has directed creation of a $250,000 fund to assist residents with reloca- tion. Thanks to the work of these agencies and the City Council, approximately 50 of the 60 New Madison tenants have been housed, if only temporarily in some cases (several are at the House of Charity). This is virtually miraculous, but it must not distract us from the reality that we remain in the midst of an unprecedented social emergency. The second crisis is the long -term one. The present housing predicament is clearly only the beginning: the future promises more of this trend. There are at least two dynamics at work here. First, certain Downtown business people www .catholiccharitiesspokane.org have indicated they intend to create pressure to remove the House of Charity from Downtown. In short, in the minds of some of Spokane's most influential people, the poor - and those who serve or advocate for them - are not welcome, at least in Downtown. Apparently, the poor just don't fit the image of an up- and - coming city. A second factor in the long -term situation is the complete absence of plans to build low- income housing on the scale necessary to meet the needs of the present, much less the future. The general consensus in the housing community is that at least 500 new units need to be built in the next five or so years to keep up with need. And new projects require approximately three years to develop. Let me be clear: I think an economically healthy and progressive community - particularly Downtown - is a positive and desirable thing. And a Downtown that includes a vibrant residen- tial community is a key component of such an economically healthy region. But such neigh- borhoods must be diverse and draw upon the strengths contributed by people of all back- grounds. They must not be exclusive. Indeed, as soon as we plan to exclude the poor from our communities, we come face to face with the description of the final judgment Christ provides in the Gospel (Mt 25, 3146). We must ask our- selves now - for Christ will ask us later - how do we, individually and as a community, treat the least among us? The Gospel offers but a single alternative. There are many ways, however, for our com- munity to live out that Gospel alternative, all of which also allow for - healthy community growth and development. For instance, some cities require developers to include housing for citizens of all income levels in all developments. Another option might require developers to contribute to a community fund for the building of low- income housing (forms of this concept are already at work in Washington State). There are many variations on these ideas - and other similar ideas as well - that will facilitate robust community growth for all citizens, not just the most wealthy. The options are almost as end- less as they are exciting and filled with potential. But our community is unlikely to pursue any of these options unless we, its members, demand it. Now, it seems to me, is one of St. Francis' -times to "use words." We must use words to offer our City Council thanks for their contribu- tion to resolving the current crisis, but also to' communicate both our outrage at the injustice of forcing the poor from their homes with little option and our insistence that all development must be done in a way that strengthens hu- man dignity and builds community. We must use words to tell our civic leaders that we want Spokane to be a place known for inclusion and compassion, not exclusivity and elitism, and as a place where all are welcome, and all are valued. We must use words to tell our spiritual leaders we expect them to speak out against the social injustice that prevents many from being adequately housed (ethical criticism and a sense of moral outrage are notable for their absence in the present discussion). We must use words to encourage our social service agencies to redouble their efforts to build more low- income housing. Spokane is at a critical juncture, and its future - and each of ours as well, both temporal and otherwise - is in our hands. Oh Lord, may we always remember it is you whom we feed, house, clothe, welcome, and .include in our community. Michael Cain Program Coordinator Page 1 of 1 Shogan, Joe From: Patrick Malone [pcmwccc @hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 8:22 AM To: caig @cet.com Cc: jbmager @earthlink.net; bertc @spokesman.com; LFinney @Chamber. Spokane. net;, lindelbart@aol.com; Hession, Dennis; Neighborhood- Alliance- Spokane -L- owner @yahoogroups.com; vhmwccc @hotmail.com; Neighborhood- Alliance - Spokane- L @yahoogroups.com; jroe @spokaneyfc.org; hneff @whitworth.edu; sheddan @gntech.net; westbridgecoop @hotmaii.com; calendar @inlander.com; cfp @iea.com; cmiller @thelocalplanet.com; dougf @spokesman.com; easterneremail @yahoo.com; isamuj @spokesman.com; letters @inlander.com; ninac @spokesman.com; vnh @iea.com; French, Al; Apple, Bob; Shogan, Joe; Verner, Mary; McLaughlin, Nancy; connie -cm @hotmail.com; waltsoe @allmail.net Subject: RE: WC Neigh borhoodMeeting Thank you George. Always helpful to get a reminder on the important meetings in the neighborhood. One caution might be to remove the final tag at the end of your message - "offer your 'support'... regarding this WCNC supported project." It may add a degree of neutrality for all residences coming to offer any and all comments. Anyway, I'm sure identical comments, notice and support with be equally given other valuable neighborhood projects, such as the Spokane Urban Ministries proposal to build affordable housing at F the corner of Walnut and Broadway and their meeting August 27th at 7:00pm at Salem Lutheran Church (1428 W. Broadway). As you well know, affordable housing is currently a crisis and near emergency situation in Spokane as a result of the new Comprehensive Plan. The combined efforts of 4 central city Lutheran congregations to redevelop under- utilized land into new a mixed -use project a 1/2 block from Dr. DeWood and next door to Kendall Yards represents a significant opportunity for West Central and the City of Spokane for new affordable mixed -use development (something we desperately need in our core area). Thank you for reminding all West Central residents of the many opportunities to reinvest in our future. Sincerely,. Connie and Patrick Malone (WC residents, property and business owners) From: George Craig<craig@acetcom> To: George Craig, West Central" <cra1g9cet.com> Subject: Meeting Date: Fri, 17 Aug 200718.•22:47 -0700 Public Meeting for DeWood West Central Development on West Broadway: A public meeting to hear Traffic flow and comments on the West Central Development will be held on Monday, August 20, 2007, 6:00 -8:00 p.m., at the West Central Community Center. This meeting is open to public and all neighborhood residents and businesses are encourage to attend the meeting and offer your support and comments regarding this WCNC supported project. 8/20/2007 Page I of I Shogan, Joe From: Verner, Mary Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2007 5:03 PM To: Mathew Plank; Stark,, Brad;. Apple, Bob; French, Al; Shogan, Joe; Crow, Rob; Franklin, Mary Subject: RE: One-of-a-Kind Event You Can't Miss (Nancy McLaughlin is in it too!) This event will be great fun, I'm sure! Mary V. From: Mathew Plank [mailto:MPlank@unitedwayspokane.org] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 2:48 PM To: Stark, Brad; Verner, Mary; Apple, Bob; French, Al; Shogan, Joe;. Crow, Rob; Franklin, Mary Subject: One-of-a-Kind Event You Can't.Miss (Nancy. McLaughlin is.in it too!). 8/20/2007 Pike Place Market Page 1 of 1 Sell Your Farm Produce (,tom Become a Craftsperson . .� Become a Performer Open a Business 1-..a Live in the Market 'g IBM Volunteer C_ Market Organizations Live in the Market Even most locals don't know that Pike Place Market is home to about 500 people. The Pik Place Market Preservation and Development Authority (PDA) manages seven affordable and low- income housing buildings in the Market, all of which have easy access to the Market's many amenities. The Market has studio, one - bedroom, two- bedroom and Single Resident Occupancy (SRO) apartments with a kitchenette and shared bathroom. Many of these apartments are reserved for low- income elderly or low- income workers in the downtown area. In order to qualify for federally subsidized buildings, applicants must be low- income and elderly. Because rent at these buildings is subsidized by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), tenants receive a rent subsidy and pay only 30% of their monthly income as rent, including most utilities (electricity, water, and garbage). For more information, or to apply to be on a waiting list for low- income housing at the Market, call (206) 682 -7453. All applicants are required to meet on -site with the resident manager for an interview before being placed on any waiting lists. CURRENTLY AVAILABLE: New affordable studio apartments in the heart of Pike Place Market, some with a view of Pugest Sound. $545 - $681 per month. Must be 55 or older and meet income requirements. Please contact colbyCa pikeplacemarket.org or call 206 - 774 -5294 for more information. http: / /www.pikeplacemarket.org /site.asp ?p = livemarket 8/2/2007 � © ®� .! Si ©� / � \