Laserfiche WebLink
8 <br />associated with the ongoing purchase of a poem through repayment of a mortgage <br />obligation. The Charter amendment allows the City “to make grants … of funds to low- <br />or moderate-income persons to aid in the purchase of any…dwelling…” If the City <br />cannot establish that the money being given away as grants to individual persons is not <br />reasonably related to the objective of assist persons with the purchase of a home, then it <br />may be difficult to defend any program that is set up as being one designed to implement <br />the Charter language. Alexandria does not impose this as a requirement, but it is the <br />opinion of the City Attorney that not having the mortgage requirement is vulnerability in <br />the program that they have established. <br /> <br />In any event, whether or not Council chooses to specify an ongoing mortgage obligation <br />as an eligibility requirement, Council should articulate in its discussions of the program <br />its assessment of how it believes that the final program will promote the objectives of the <br />charter. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked if VHDA loans require citizenship, and Ms. Kelley said she <br />does not know. <br /> Mr. Lynch agreed that this is a decent start and a tool to help people with <br />affordable home ownership. He said Council needs to discuss in the coming year how to <br />better address the issue. He said it would be most equitable in the long-term to recognize <br />that residential property values have increased at a higher rate than commercial <br />properties, but the State says all classifications are taxed at the same rate. He said rental <br />and commercial property owners got the benefit of the lower tax rate. He said personally <br />he would like to see the cap higher, but feels the one proposed is defensible and he feels <br />it makes sense to go forward with it. Regarding the question about a deferral, he said he <br />thinks we can set up such a program in the coming year. He said the fairer thing to do is <br />to look at a differential tax rate. <br /> <br /> Dr. Brown said he thinks this is a good start, addresses a specific concern and is a <br />tool to give some relief to a targeted group. He said he agrees with some of Mr. <br />Schilling’s comments such as the student/parent point and owning property outside of the <br />City. He said he disagrees with requiring that applicants be citizens as he thinks that if <br />someone is paying taxes they should be eligible. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said he thinks this is a weak start, and he does not think it is directed <br />at people who really need it. He said he would prefer that the income limit go down to <br />capture more people in the $25,000 range. He encouraged future Councils to look at a <br />tiered approach. He noted that it will be subject to an annual review and will have to be <br />funded annually in the budget. He said he thinks the truer test is the asset side rather than <br />owning other real estate. He said the program will probably need to grow in the future. <br />He reminded people that Charlottesville has one of the poorest populations in Virginia. <br />Mr. Caravati made a motion to approve the ordinance. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch seconded the motion. He said it is worth stating that regarding <br />preserving home ownership, the Alexandria program has been tested for several years. <br /> <br /> The ordinance entitled “AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A GRANT <br />PROGRAM TO PROMOTE AND PRESERVE HOMEOWNERSHPI BY LOW- AND <br />MODERATE-INCOME PERSONS WITHIN THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE” <br />was offered and carried over to the next meeting for consideration. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING/ORDINANCE <br />: CLOSING GROVE STREET EXTENDED <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said he has a conflict of interest and will remove himself from the <br />discussion. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brown said that the property in question is a 50 x 181 foot section that the <br />City has never accepted into the street system. Mr. Brown said Council is required to <br />consider the following: 1) Will vacating the street impede any persons’ access to his <br />property or other wise cause irreparable damage to the owner of any lot shown on the <br />original subdivision plat; 2) Are there any public utilities currently located in the area <br />proposed to be vacated, and if so, is the applicant offering to allow the City to reserve a <br /> <br />