Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-0331 VLHA Meeting MinutesMinutes Vail Local Housing Authority (VLHA) March 31, 2016 at 11:00 AM Attending the meeting were members: James Wilkins Steve Lindstrom Mary McDougall Absent members: Scott Ashburn Town staff attending the meeting: Alan Nazzaro George Ruther A quorum of VLHA Members being present, Steve Lindstrom called the meeting to order at 11:20. I. Meeting Notice and Approval of minutes The Board considered the minutes sent with the Meeting Packet for previous VLHA Meeting held on 3/22/16. James Wilkins moved to accept all of the minutes as presented. Mary McDougall seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. II. Fee in Lieu Staff requested that the Board listen to a presentation scheduled to be made to Town Council at the April 5, 2016 meeting, regarding the calculation formula for determining the Fee in Lieu amount for Commercial Linkage, Inclusionary Zoning, and EHU Exchanges. Staff disseminated copies of the memo prepared for Council and presented a PPT that highlighted the salient points of the memo. The presentation sowed the background/history of the fee in lieu and the variables the Town had chosen to calculate the fee. The Board was “walked” through the calculation and how the fee was arrived at using the current year’s variables. They presented the “pros & cons” of the methodology and variables and discussed how some other communities differ in their approaches. They went over some options for changes to the variables and how they affect the outcome of the formula. Finally they presented staff recommendations that were being made to Council for potential changes to the variables. Discussion ensued, which elicited the following input: Fee in lieu may need different approaches for different applications Commercial Linkage for large companies vs. small businesses Inclusionary Zoning for a small remodel vs. EHU Exchange in a second home Possibly variable rates for different deed restrictions and different locations in town Need to determine, “what is the ultimate goal of the program”? Is it to build more EHUs? Is it to preserve existing EHUs? Is it to make it easier for property owners to relinquish their obligation? III. Lottery Recommendations The discussion opened about the Lottery System. The question was posed, “Do we want a more open Lottery?” One not based upon longevity. The previous discussions by the Board on this topic were reviewed: The current lottery is biased towards longevity in the valley and doesn’t allow you to own property (except for deed restricted) at time of application. This favors long-time renters in the Town of Vail over others. Seems to be a competing objective with the Chamonix Neighborhood objective of attracting families back to town from down valley. Is the Town wanting to attract “new blood” to Vail, if so, newly arriving families or employees have no chance with the current lottery of ever getting to own a home here. The criteria for the lottery should be simply, “do you meet the deed restriction qualifications”? A straight open lottery without bias would and based upon DR qualifications would make it a true lottery. There would be political backlash for making a change. The question was posed, should there maybe be a “weighting” of entries based upon working in Vail? That would give people a better chance to live near where they work. Ultimately, we need to know what the overriding goal of the lottery is. Which problem are we trying to solve? Do we want to create community or reward longevity? Also why only an annual lottery? Why not hold lotteries for every unit that comes on the market. We would maintain a master list of eligible applicants, who have qualified for the deed restriction criteria. When a unit becomes available a notice is sent to all applicants and those interested in being in the lottery for the specific unit would acquire a mortgage qualification letter form their lender and send it to the Town with notice of intent to participate. A true lottery of only those who respond would be held and the buyer selected from that smaller pool of interest applicants for the specific unit. The group discussed the following: Basically, you must meet the deed restriction requirements to be on the Master List, which would include: use a unit as their primary residence must be employed an average of 30 hours/week per year - Eagle County business 75% of their income and earnings from that Eagle County business But the following items are more related directly to the deed restrictions and should not necessarily be used in connection to the Master List: prequalified with a mortgage lender may not own residential real estate in Eagle County at the time of application, except where that real estate is deed restricted Town of Vail EHU for the 3-bedroom lottery must have a household size of 3 or more persons The group discussed whether or not existing property ownership should not be a lottery consideration, but rather taken into account under the deed restriction. Furthermore, the family size limitations seem to be in conflict with the stated goal of attracting young families. What about people whose need for housing have changed or are starting a family? The thinking was that perhaps the three member household rule for 3-bedroom units should be eliminated for the lottery or altogether. After much discussion the following recommendations for changes in the lottery system were outlined for Town Council consideration: Basic compliance with deed restriction requirements outlined above, except: Can still own property in Eagle County True Lottery, i.e., pull names of all qualified applicants from hat Lottery will be for units as they come available not just once a year All applicants must take the approved homeownership class The prequalification letter would be due at time of lottery and not for the Master List of qualified applicants IV. Deed Restrictions Recommendations: A brief discussion was held on the Deed Restriction topic. It was noted that we should consider variable restrictions that correspond to amount of subsidy on the property. The higher the subsidy the more restrictions are imposed. It was also discussed that the benefits of home ownership go beyond Real estate investing. The subsidy, the tax write-off, and the ability to own rather than rent need to be considered. Staff will compile the notes from the lottery discussion and additional ideas on deed restrictions to be discussed at the next meeting in tow weeks. V. Next Meeting It was decided that there needs to be a follow-up meeting with the staff and VLHA to crystalize some of the Lottery, and Deed Restriction recommendations to Town Council. It was decided to meet in two weeks to continue the discussion at 3:00 PM on April 13, 2016. There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 12:55 PM. Respectfully Submitted, ____________________ Housing Staff INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this ______ day of ___________________, 2016.