2007-01-02 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5 over a number of years. He asked that Council give staff guidance. He said another issue is policy direction and the criteria for administering the funds. He said there is a lot of work to be done on the proposal. Ms. Hamilton asked if the estimate of $500,000 from developer contributions is realistic. Mr. O’Connell said there are legal questions about this issue. Mr. Tolbert said he thinks we can create opportunities, but we may need some different legislation. Mr. Craig Brown, City Attorney, said that enabling legislation has been requested in the City’s legislative package, but he is not sure how realistic the estimate is. Dr. Brown asked what things we are doing now with CDBG/HOME funds that we would no longer do if these funds are designated for this program. Mr. Tolbert said these funds are currently used for the following: substantial owner occupied rehabilitation, downpayment assistance, special needs rehabilitation, weatherization, downpayment assistance, Forest Street rehabilitation, public housing renovation, downpayment/closing costs, housing initiatives, and housing trust fund. Mr. Lynch said it seems as thought we are reinventing the wheel regarding the CDBG/HOME funds. He said he has heard no compelling argument that the CDBG process is broken. Mr. Norris said the idea is to simplify the process and expand the pot of money. He said the question is whether there are enough dollars to meet the need. Ms. Hamilton said that currently some small organizations cannot meet the federal reporting requirements for CDBG funds. Responding to a question from Dr. Brown about how transient room taxes are currently dedicated, Mr. Lynch said part goes to the Visitors Center and Mr. O’Connell said the remainder goes to the general fund. Mr. Lynch said he is broadly in support of the proposal, but has some general and specific concerns. He said his general concerns include: 1) The regional nature of the proposal. He said Charlottesville has all the public housing and half of Section 8 housing. He said we need to reach out to other localities as we are being asked to solve regional problems. He said we need to make sure Charlottesville residents have the priority; 2) He said we also have a really big wage issue here and we need to look at that side and spend more money on workforce development. He said we are not looking at a balanced solution. 3) Charlottesville is a university town, and U. Va. has made a policy of not providing enough student housing. He said he does not think that just putting $1 million in is a silver bullet and may exacerbate the problem. He said his specific concerns include: 1) He agrees with the concept of a 25% set aside of transit room taxes, but would like to see it go for those on the low end of the tourism industry; 2) He is concerned about juggling CDBG money and does not want to reinvent the wheel. He said we do have a fair process now that gives us accountability. 3) He said if we can get developer contributions that would be great. He said we need to figure out how to get $25,000 lots for $120,000 houses. He said the proposal addresses the dollar side, but not the implementation side. Ms. Hamilton said that one assumption behind the proposal is the availability of lots owned by CRHA. She said mixed income redevelopment can be created on lots currently owned by CRHA. Mr. Taliaferro suggested that staff look at the proposal and make recommendations, including the idea of phasing the program in. He said we should also take a look at having regional partners.