A1 Affordable Housing Finance Working Group Report (PDF)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Jackie Biskupski MIKE REBERG Mayor Community and Economic Development SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION Community and Economic Development City Council Transmittal Date Received:8/12/2016 Date Sent to Council:8/15/2016 TO: City Council James Rogers - Chair FROM: SUBJECT: Housing & Neighborhood Development Presentation of Potential Affordable Housing Solutions STAFF CONTACT: Michael Akerlow, HAND Director [email protected] COUNCIL SPONSOR: Council Member, District 5 - Erin Mendenhall DOCUMENT TYPE: Information Item RECOMMENDATION: Council and the Administration pursue key strategies & solutions that will result in the funding, policy, and incentives necessary to create sustainable affordable housing throughout Salt Lake City BUDGET IMPACT: None Summary: This transmittal summarizes the attached brief “Affordable Housing Finance Working Group: Report & Recommendations”. This brief is a product of a 2 month process with a small working group of experts tasked with exploring the current financial gap in affordable housing development and possible solutions to address this gap. HAND staff has presented these initial findings to Mayor Biskupski and will continue to provide specifics around budget and process required for each recommended solution. Background/Discussion: HAND has become increasingly aware of the need for affordable housing and, as such, has launched several efforts to create more access to affordability in the city. Through the analysis of data and community input the lack of funding has been identified as the main barrier in creating and sustaining affordable units in Salt Lake City. Specifically this refers to the subsidy needed in order to have rents lowered to serve people below 80% area median income (AMI) with a special emphasis on 40% AMI. In an effort to find solutions to the lack of funding HAND has been working closely with affordable housing experts to understand the more intricate nuances of funding affordable housing and any associated policy implications. Currently, the only city administered incentives are the waivers of impact fees, building permit fees, and the Housing Trust Fund. HAND brought together two working groups: the first a Finance Working Group and the second a Housing Strategy Working Group. Both groups explored how Salt Lake City could be a catalyst for creating short term and long-term solutions, and are helping contextualize important issues that the 2017 – 2021 Housing Plan will address. The Housing Strategy Group is still in process and HAND expects to produce a brief this fall on its progress. This brief highlights preliminary findings from the Finance Working Group and funding solutions for this complex issue. Affordable Housing Finance Working Group In order to respond to the challenge of building and financing affordable housing and advancing the 2017 – 2021 Housing Plan, the HAND Division has been working on identifying innovative strategies from other cities to inform our local discussion. In order to ensure that such strategies and research are relevant, financially sound, and socially responsible HAND launched an Affordable Housing Finance Working Group. This group consists of experts in our community, not only in housing issues, but development. They were carefully selected for their commitment and their ability to produce sound financial models that can sustain affordable housing. Further, two members sit on the Housing Trust Fund Advisory Board which currently is the most utilized tool in the city to build affordable housing. This group met for a very concentrated period of time (just over 2 months) to explore the options that might work best for the City, Residents, and Developers as we commit to long-term strategies for Salt Lake City residents. The group had 2 major goals: 1. Explore alternative funding mechanisms for affordable housing 2. Offer recommendations to the Housing Trust Fund that ensure it is functioning at its best use for our community The group consisted of the following members: Finance Working Group Claudia O’Grady – Utah Housing Corporation Jeff Nielson - Wasatch Group Ryan Hackett – Western Region Nonprofit Housing Marion Willey – Utah Nonprofit Housing Irena Edwards - Housing Trust Fund Joni Clark – SL Community Action Program Steve Akerlow - Morgan Stanley Michael Lohr - Goldman Sachs Ali Oliver - Housing Trust Fund Chris Parker - Giv Group Summary of Findings The attached brief describes the key findings and recommendations from the working group and the recommendations of HAND. A main take away from the group is that land cost continues to be the most influential factor in how and where affordable housing is built. While not traditionally used as a subsidy, land cost has the largest effect on the ability of the developer to determine how many affordable units are feasible and at what percent of AMI. A secondary take away is the need for solutions and systems to work together. One recommendation will not solve the housing crisis but will require the combination of several tactics. This includes leveraging existing resources like vouchers and working closely with Utah Housing Corporation through their tax credit allocation plan process. These main factors were weighed deeply during this process and while the recommendations are flexible, finding a solution that overcomes land cost and financing gap is key to any successful model. In conclusion, determining a funding source with a sound strategy that is reliable and well managed is key to the preservation, assistance, and creation of affordable housing. Below is a highlight a few of the top recommendations of the working group. While not comprehensive this provides highlights of the variety of tools explored including policy, incentive, and funding tools. Working Group Recommendations Inclusionary Zoning This policy tool has been used in hundreds of cities throughout the Po US with mixed levels of success. Provides a regulated mechanism lic ensuring affordable housing be considered in every development. y Missing Middle Housing Through zoning changes, missing middle housing could create a wider range of housing types and could contribute to a more equitable distribution of affordable housing stock. Community Land Trust Tool used to acquire and retain land for the primary purpose of and/or Land Banking affordable housing. This is a key component for long-term preservation and directly counteracts the rising price of land. Tax Abatement While considered a very effective incentive, the abatement process would need to be approved by the State of Utah. This tool provides Inc significant room for developers to increase their ability to take on ent more debt and further subsidize units. ive Increased City Access This would be an expedited process and comprehensive fee waiver s system. In addition a housing ombudsman was a top priority in developing affordable housing. Equity Investing This method of investment has the potential for higher returns but also carries significant risk. Since this is not widely used it is difficult Inc to know the accuracy with which this could be used to produce ent additional affordability. ive City Issued Bond or Levy A bond or levy has the ability to provide funding that could be s committed to a variety of housing needs. This has the potential to meet the needs of those experiencing homelessness to those looking to buy their first home. The limitations of a bond are directly related to restricted use and purpose that are inherent in the structure. A levy, on the other hand, is a consistent source of revenue and could be used in a variety of ways from prevention to preservation. Real Estate Document Fees Document fees are common across the country and are considered to have a direct correlation to the housing market. A nominal fee could be used to increase the dollar amount in the Housing Trust Fund but would not be large enough to begin to close the housing gap the City is currently experiencing. Linkage and/or Impact Currently the state statute prohibits the use of impact and/or linkage Fees fees outside of listed activities within the statute. This mechanism is used across the country and could be considered as a long term and comprehensive strategy for the State. This fee structure is based on a measurable link between development and housing. Peer-to-Peer Rental Fees This revenue source would continue to grow over time as the market progresses. Currently, there isn’t a framework in which to regulate this process in Utah. Salt Lake City could consider both an occupancy fee and/or a permit fee for residents who operate a peer- to-peer rental. The tools outlined above vary in implementation, compliance and cost. So while all should be considered in relation to those factors it is also important to weigh impact. Below is a preliminary assessment on potential impact of those tools with numerical foundations that could be quantified. The impact analysis below is a highlight of potential impact based on the estimated cost of predicted revenue and the gap financing needed per unit. Such scenarios vary widely and can continue to be narrowed and solidified as HAND’s housing strategy is defined. Impact Analysis Tools Potential Impact Funding Inclusionary Zoning If the City had imposed an affordable housing “in lieu” fee requirement since the inception of the TSA between $50,000 – zone roughly 1,658 units would have been 100,000/unit produced Community Land Trust Lasting impact through affordable preservation No direct funding in perpetuity Tax Abatement Reduce subsidy needed