Item I4M
C ounty of f Monroe
ELj » °o
�
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
/�
�
Mayor David Rice, District 4
Th e Florida Keys
Mayor Pro Tem Sylvia J. Murphy, District 5
Danny L. Kolhage, District 1
George Neugent, District 2
Heather Carruthers, District 3
County Commission Meeting
January 17, 2018
Agenda Item Number: I.4
Agenda Item Summary #3762
BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: Planning/Environmental Resources
TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Mayte Santamaria (305) 289 -2500
N/A
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A BOCC Impact Meeting (public meeting) regarding a proposal to
amend the Monroe County Land Development Code Section 139 -1, Affordable and Employee
Housing; Administration, to specify that when calculating density, affordable housing density shall
be excluded from calculations of cumulative hotel /motel density on a parcel (operating as a density
bonus for the development of affordable /employee housing on properties with a hotel /motel).
ITEM BACKGROUND: The Applicant, Longstock II, LLC, is proposing an amendment to the
Monroe County Land Development Code (LDC) which would specify that when calculating density,
affordable housing density shall be excluded from calculations of cumulative hotel /motel density on
a parcel (operating as a density bonus for the development of affordable /employee housing on
properties with a hotel /motel). The proposed amendment would have a county -wide impact, in that it
would apply to affordable housing and hotel /motel development proposals throughout the entire
unincorporated County. For reference, maps showing the locations of existing Tier III hotel /motel
properties, per Monroe County Property Appraiser data, are attached as agenda item backup as
examples of sites that could potentially receive additional density as a result of the proposed
amendment.
Proposed text amendment (proposed addition to existing LDC language underlined
Section 139 -1. Affordable and Employee Housing; Administration.
(a)
(5) Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, when calculating density, any
existing lawfully established or proposed affordable or employee housing on a
parcel and the floor area thereof shall be excluded from the calculation of the total
gross nonresidential floor area development and hotel /motel density that may be
lawfully established on the parcel, provided, however, that the total residential
density allowed on the site shall not exceed the maximum net density for
affordable and employee housing.
As adopted by the BOCC as part of the recent update to the Comprehensive Plan and the LDC (Ord.
No. 005 -2016 and 006 -2016, effective February 3, 2017), Policy 1302.1.6 of the Comprehensive
Plan and Section 102- 159(b)(2) of the LDC require that private proposals to amend the text of the
Land Development Code hold a public meeting with the Board of County Commissioners ( "Impact
Meeting ") prior to the application proceeding to the Development Review Committee for review.
The Impact Meeting is not to be a public hearing (the BOCC will not vote on the proposal), but
a public meeting during which the BOCC may offer their initial opinions and the public may
have input on the proposed amendment.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
BOCC 4/13/16: BOCC adopted Ordinance 005 -2016 - the Monroe County Year 2030
Comprehensive Plan EAR -based amendments, and Ordinance 006 -2016 - amending the Monroe
County Land Development Code to be consistent with the Monroe County Year 2030
Comprehensive Plan EAR -based amendments; and included the requirement that private proposals
to amend the text of the Land Development Code and /or Comprehensive Plan hold a public meeting
with the Board of County Commissioners ( "Impact Meeting ") prior to the application proceeding to
the Development Review Committee for review.
CONTRACT /AGREEMENT CHANGES:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Discussion and direction - The Impact Meeting is not to be a
public hearing (the BOCC will not vote on the proposal), but a public meeting during which the
BOCC may offer their initial opinions and the public may have input on the proposed amendment.
DOCUMENTATION:
Application File (Planning File #2017 -075)
Hotels TierIII
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Effective Date: N/A
Expiration Date: N/A
Total Dollar Value of Contract: N/A
Total Cost to County: N/A
Current Year Portion: N/A
Budgeted: N/A
Source of Funds:
CPI: N/A
Indirect Costs: N/A
Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts: N/A
Revenue Producing: N/A If yes, amount: N/A
Grant: N/A
County Match: N/A
Insurance Required: N/A
Additional Details: N/A
I to] WTAi Do 1111"
Mayte Santamaria
Completed
Assistant County Administrator Christine Hurley
12/28/2017 12:38 PM
Peter Morris
Completed
Jaclyn Carnago
Completed
Budget and Finance
Skipped
Maria Slavik
Skipped
Mayte Santamaria
Completed
Emily Schemper
Completed
Kathy Peters
Completed
Board of County Commissioners
Pending
12/28/2017 12:17 PM
Completed
12/28/2017 3:03 PM
12/28/2017 3:17 PM
12/26/2017 3:23 PM
12/26/2017 3:23 PM
12/28/2017 6:02 PM
12/28/2017 6:12 PM
12/29/2017 9:11 AM
01/17/2018 9:00 AM
File #:
Owner's Name:
Applicant:
Agent:
Type of Application:
2017 -075
Longstock II, LLC
Barton W. Smith, Esq:
Smith Hawks, PL
Barton W. Smith, Esq:
Smith Hawks, PL
LDC Text Amendment
County of Monroe
Planning & Environmental Resources
Department
2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 410
Marathon, FL 33050
Voice: (305) 289 -2500
FAX: (305) 289 -2536
Board of County Commissioners
Mayor George Neugent, District 2
Mayor Pro Tern David Rice, District 4
Heather Carruthers. District 3
Danny L. KoLhage, District 1
Sylvia Murphy District 5
We strive to be wring, professional, and fair.
Date:
Time:
Dear Applicant:
05.23- 11
This is to acknowledge submittal of your application for L-bG - T*'KL Ang wdro eenf,
Type of application
�0 rl 6tO C k ..It , LLLC to the Monroe County Planning Department.
v Project / /1larne
'hank you.
1
Planning Zff
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
Land Development Code (LDC) Text Amendment Application
E _ _.._..___ . _.._. _. - _. __:. -__. ._... . _ ,..:_ -' . - -- - :r- -___'- _ _- .__ _ . . - -, - - -_.
An application must be deemed complete and in compliance with the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan and
Code by the staff prior to the itein being scheduled for review
Application Fee: $5,950.00
The base fee includes two internal staff meetings with applicants; one Development Review Committee meeting, one
Planning Commission public hearing; and one Board of County Commission public hearing. If this minimum number
of meetings/hearings is exceeded, additional fees shall be charged pursuant to Fee Schedule Resolution and paid prior
to the private application proceeding through public hearings.
In addition to the application fee, the follotiving fees also apply:
Advertising Costs. $245.00
Surrounding Property Owner Notification (SPON): $3.00 for each property owner required to be noticed
Transportation Study Review: $5,000.00 Deposit (any unused funds will be returned upon approval)
Advertising and Noticing fees for a community meeting: $245.00 plus $3.00 /SPON
Date of Request: 05
22 i 2017
Month Day Year
Applicant / Agent Authorized to Act for Property Owner: (Agents must provide notarized authorization from all property owners.)
Barton W. Smith, Esq; Smith Hawks, PL
Applicant (Name of Person, Business or Organization) Name of Person Submitting this Application
138 Simonton Street, Key West, Florida 33040
Mailing Address (Street, City, State and Zip Code)
305 -296 -7227 bart@smithhawks.com
Work Phone Home Phone Cell Phone Email Address
Property Owner: (Business /Corp must include documents showing who has legal authority to sign.)
LONGSTOCK II, LLC
(Name/Entity) Contact Person
7009 Shrimp Road, Suite 2, Key West, Florida 33040
Mailing Address (Street, City, State and Zip Code)
Work Phone Home Phone Cell Phone Email Address
Page 1 of 7 20; 7
Section(s) of Land Development Code Affected
Section 139- 1(a)(5)
Please describe the reason for the proposed text amendment (attach additional sheets if necessary):
See attached.
Please describe how the proposed amendment implements and is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan:
See attached.
Please describe how proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding
Development for the Florida Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statute:
See attached.
Page 2 of 7 r�.;
The Board of County Commissioners may consider an amendment if the change is based on one
or more of the following factors. Please describe how one or more of the following factors shall be
met (attach additional sheets if necessary):
1) Changed projections (e.g. regarding public service needs) from those on which the text was
based
See attached.
2) Changed assumptions (e.g. regarding demographic trends):
See attached.
3) Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and natural features:
See attached.
4) New issues:
See attached.
5) Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness:
See attached.
Page 3 of 7
6) Data updates:
See attached.
In no event shall an amendment be approved which will result in an adverse community change of
the planning area in which the proposed development is located or to any area in accordance with
a Livable CommuniKeys master plan. Please describe how the text amendment would not result
in an adverse community change (attach additional sheets if necessary):
See attached.
Applicants submitting an application for an amendment to the text of the Land Development Code
shall participate in a concept meeting with the Planning and Environmental Resources
Department, as indicated in Section 102- 158(d)(3), to discuss the proposed amendment.
Scheduling. A concept meeting shall be scheduled by department staff once the application is
determined to be complete.
As part of this concept meeting, department staff will identify whether or not the proposed text
amendment will have a county -wide impact. If the proposal is determined to have a county -wide
impact a public meeting with the Board of County Commissioners ( "Impact Meeting ") prior to
the application proceeding to the DRC for review is required. The applicant shall coordinate with
the Planning Director regarding the date and time of the Impact Meeting; however, all Impact
Meetings shall be held in Marathon.
Notice of Meeting. The Impact Meeting shall be noticed at least 15 days prior to the meeting date by
advertisement in a Monroe County newspaper of general circulation.
Noticing and Advertising Casts. The applicant shall pay the cost of the public notice and advertising for the
Impact Meeting and provide proof of proper notice to the Planning Director.
The Impact Meeting is not to be a public hearing (the BOCC will not vote on the proposal),
but a public meeting during which the BOCC may offer their initial opinions and the public
may have input on the proposed amendment.
PROOF OF PROPER NOTICING ON THE IMPACT MEETING WILL BE REQUIRED.
Page 4 of 7 % i
Applicants requesting a Land Development Code Text Amendment shall provide for public
participation through a community meeting
Scheduling. The applicant will coordinate with the Planning Director regarding the date, time and location of
the proposed community meeting; however, all meetings are to be held on a weekday evening at least three
(3) months prior to any of the public hearings.
Notice of Meeting. The community meeting shall be noticed at least 15 days prior to the meeting date by
advertisement in a Monroe County newspaper of general circulation, mailing of notice to surrounding
property owners, and posting of the subject property.
Noticing and Advertising Costs. The applicant shall pay the cost of the public notice and advertising for the
community meeting and provide proof of proper notice to the Planning Director.
The community meeting shall be facilitated by a representative from the Monroe County Planning &
Environmental Resources Department and the applicant shall be present at the meeting.
PROOF OF PROPER NOTICING ON THE COMMUNITY MEETING WILL BE REQUIRED.
All of the following must be submitted in order to have a complete application submittal
(Please check as you attach each required item to the application)
El Completed application form (unaltered and unbound)
0 Correct fee (check or money order payable to Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources)
0 Existing text of Land Development Code section(s) affected
® Proposed amendment(s) to text of Land Development Code section(s). Must be provided in
strikethrough and underline format.
❑ If a site specific amendment is proposed: Not applicable.
❑ Proof of ownership (i.e., Warranty Deed)
❑ Ownership Disclosure Fortis
❑ Current Property Record Card(s) from the Monroe County Property Appraiser
❑ Location map
❑ Photograph(s) of site(s) from adjacent roadway(s)
❑ Signed and Sealed Boundary Survey(s), prepared by a Florida registered surveyor — eight
(8) sets (at a minimum, survey should include elevations; location and dimensions of all
existing structures, paved areas and utility structures; all bodies of water on the site and
adjacent to the site; total acreage by land use district; total acreage by habitat; and total
upland area
❑ Typed name and address mailing labels of all property owners within a 600 foot radius of
the property(s) — (three sets). This list should be compiled from the current tax rolls of
the Monroe County Property Appraiser. In the event that a condominium development is
within the 600 foot radius, each unit owner must be included
Page 5 of 7
If applicable, the following must be submitted in order to have a complete application submittal;
0 Notarized Agent Authorization Letter (note: authorization is needed from all owner(s) of the subject
property)
❑ Proof of Ownership & Ownership Disclosure Form (required if application affects specific and
defined area) Not applicable.
❑ Sealed Boundary Survey, prepared by a Florida registered surveyor — eight (8) sets (required if
application affects specific and defined area) Not applicable.
❑ Location map (required if application affects specific and defined area) Not applicable.
Not
❑ Copy of current Future Land Use Map (required if application affects specific and defined area) applicat
❑ Typed name and address mailing labels of all property owners within a 600 foot radius of the
property(s) — (three sets). This list should be compiled from the current tax rolls of the Monroe Not
County Property Appraiser. In the event that a condominium development is within the 600 foot applica
radius, each unit owner must be included (required if application affects specific and defined area)
❑ 600ft Radius report, prepared by the Monroe County Property Appraiser's Office (required if
application affects specific and defined area) Not applicable.
❑ Traffic Study, prepared by a licensed traffic engineer (required if application affects specific and
defined area) Not applicable.
❑ Transportation fee of $5,000 to cover the cost of experts hired by the Department to review the
traffic study any unused funds deposited will be returned upon approval (required if application
affects specific and defined area) Not applicable.
If deemed necessary to complete a full review of the application, within reason, the Planning &
Environmental Resources Department reserves the right to request additional information.
Additional fees may apply pursuant to the approved fee schedule.
Has a previous application been submitted for this site(s) within the past two years? ❑ Yes 1l No
Is there a pending code enforcement proceeding involving all or a portion of the parcel(s) proposed for
development? ❑ Yes ffNo Code Case file # Describe the enforcement
proceedings and if this application is being submitted to correct the violation:
Page 6 of 7:; i !
The applicant /owner hereby acknowledges and agrees that any staff discussions or negotiations about conditions
of approval are preliminary only, and are not final, nor are they the specific conditions or demands required to
gain approval of the application, unless the conditions or demands are actually included in writing in the final
development order or the final denial determination or order.
By signing this application, the owner of the subject property authorizes the Monroe County Planning &
Environmental Resources staff to conduct all necessary site visits and inspections on the subject property.
1, the Applicant, certify that I am familiar with the information_ contained in this application, and that to the best
of my knowledge such i rm ' is true, complete and accurate.
Signature of Applicant: Date:
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MONROE
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 1 day of May 20 17
BARTON W. SMITH
b who is personally known me MX
(PRINT NAME OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT)
(TYPE OF ID PRODUCED)
as identification.
4 &VAJ
Signature of Notary Public
Print, Type or Stamp Commissioned Name of Notary Public
My commission expires: U I �� 2 a W
Send complete application package to:
Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources Department
Marathon Government Center
2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 400
Marathon, FL 33050
Page 7 of 7
BWDI GREEN
w coMMW10N # FF 965986
N
EXPIRES! June 29,2=
•.';e oe
Bonded Thru t;gwy Putft Underxrfi n
Send complete application package to:
Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources Department
Marathon Government Center
2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 400
Marathon, FL 33050
Page 7 of 7
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date of Authorization: Q / 16 / 2017
Month Day Year
i hereby authorize
Barton W. Smith, Esq., SMITH HAWKS, PL
(Print Name of Agent)
be listed as authorized agent
representing LONGSTOCK II, LLC for the application submission
(Print Name of Property Owner(s) the Applicant(s))
Land Development Code "text Amendment, Major Conditional Use Amendment, Development Agreement Amendment Minor Conditional Use transfer ofTRE
of A—Tr-t;—
(List the Name and Type of applications for the authorization)
for the Property described as: (if in metes and bounds, attach legal description on separate sheet)
Lot Block Subdivision
Real Estate (RE) Number
Street Address (Street, City, State & Zip Code)
Authorized Agent Contact Information:
138 Simonton St., Key West, FI 33.040 _
Mailing Address (Street, City, State and Zip Code)
Key (Island)
Alternate Key Number
Approximate Mile Marker
305 -296 -7227 bart @smithhawks.corn
Work Phone home Phone Cell Phone Email Address
This authorization becomes effective on the date this affidavit is notarized and shall remain in effect until terminated by the
undersigned. This authorization acts as a durable power of attorney only for the purposes stated. The undersigned understands the
risks and liabilities involved in the granting of this agency and accepts full responsibility for any and all of the actions of the agent
named herein related to the processing of the services requested, application(s) and /or the acquisition of approvals /permits for the
aforementioned applicant. The applicant(s) hereby indemnities and holds harmless Monroe County, its officers, agents and employees
for any damage to applicant caused by its agent or arising from this agency authorization.
Note: Agents must provide a nota ized auth
Signature of Property Owner:
Printed Name of Property Owner: Matthew Str as
STATE OF nwAa
eurrent property owners.
Zepresentative of Longstock II, LLC
COUNTY OF Mb"O(!b e
Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of MaY , 20 17
by Matthew Stru , who is pe onally kno n to me OR produced
(Print Name of Person Making Statement)
as identification.
(Type of ID Produced)
fir Vk Claw -
Signature of Notary Public Print, Type or Stamp Commissioned Name of Notary Public
My commission expires:
BRMD1 GREEN
MY COMMISSION # FF f}65986
EXPIRES: Jane 29, 2020
:t °P• BomMThrallotd Publ�cUnderwriiant
Packet �'g. 16U2
SMITH HAWKS
TTORNEYS AT LAW
M�i v 22, 20 17
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Ms. Mayte Santaixiaria
Senicj - Director
Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources Department
2798 Overseas fligh%vay, Suite 400
Marathon, FL. 33050
Re: Proposed Text Am endment to Seciion 139-I(a)(5) of the Monroe COlintY la
De velopment C ode
Dear ),9ayte.
Please allow this Ict or to serve as additional rnformadon i support of the enclosed Land
Development Regulation Text Amendment Application ("Application") made ou behalf of
Lorlgsto(A 11, LLC (" Applicant "). I have also enclosFdi a copy package of tlic Appl ic,:tion and
this tet and request that you please date stamp both and return the copy package in the
enclosed prepaid Federal Express envelope.
Text Amendment Background
The Text Amendment proposes to amend Section 139- 1(a)(5) of the Land i)c vJf)pment
Regulations to provide that when caiculating dcnsity, existing lawfully established or proposed
affordable or employee housing on a parcel shall be excluded from the calculation of the total
liotel /motel density that may be lawfully established on the parcel.
Amendment Request
As previously discussed, in or0e. to address the and growing short] all of affordable
housing in Monme County, Applicant has propose a text ame_idment which will allow "in -fill"
development of affordablc and /or N orhforce h ousi..L on sites developed with hotel /motel uses, a
use measured in densliv. but which requires a s4,mificainu i of employees to Operate.
Additions to the relevant portions of `3: ;l trl3i; l )9 -1 (a!( -`) a).. Set forth below 'In i a`W av d
deletions are set forth ir. Ie.�x.
0 00991 1 -,,a 1 138 SIMONTON STREET, KEY WEST, FLORIDA 33040 U.S.A.
T, 305 -296 -7227 F. 305- 296 -8448 SMITHHAWKS.COM
Ms. Mayte Santamaria
May 22, 2017
Page 2
The Proposed Amendment
Sec. 139 -1. Affordable and Employee Housing; Administration.
(a) Generally.
(1) Notwithstanding the density limitations in Section 130 -157, the owner of a parcel of land
shall be entitled to:
a. Develop affordable and employee housing as defined in Section 101 -1, on parcels of land
classified as Urban Residential (UR) at an intensity up to a maximum net residential density of
25 dwelling units per acre and on parcels of land classified as Mixed Use (MU) at an intensity up
to a maximum net residential density of 18 dwelling units per acre.
b. Develop affordable and employee housing, as defined in Section 101 -1, on parcels of land
classified as Suburban Commercial (SC) at an intensity up to a maximum net residential density
of 18 dwelling units per acre and on parcels of land classified as Urban Residential (UR) at an
intensity up to a maximum net residential density of 25 dwelling units per acre.
c. Develop market rate housing, as defined in Section 101 -1, as part of an affordable or employee
housing project in accordance with subsection (a)(8) of this section, provided that on parcels of
land classified as Urban Residential (UR), the maximum net residential density shall not be
greater than 18 dwelling units per acre.
(2) The maximum net residential density allowed per district and by this section shall not require
Transferable Development Rights (TDR) for affordable and employee housing and market rate
housing developed in accordance with subsection (a)(8) of this section.
(3) Market rate housing developed in accordance with subsection (a)(8) below shall be eligible to
receive points pursuant to Section 138- 28(a)(6).
(4) The requirements of this Land Development Code for the provision of impact fees shall be
waived for affordable and employee housing and any market rate housing developed in
accordance with subsection (a)(8) of this section.
(5) Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, when calculating density, any existing lawfully
established or proposed affordable or employee housing on a parcel and the floor area thereof
shall be excluded from the calculation of the total gross nonresidential floor area development
,aid L oicl l)lo €cl ucnsi that may be lawfully established on the parcel, provided, however, that
the total residential density allowed on the site shall not exceed the maximum net density for
affordable and employee housing.
00089911 - v4
Ms. Mayte Santamaria
May 22, 2017
Page 3
Reason for Proposed Text Amendment
This text amendment Application amends Section 139- 1(5)(a) of the Land Development
Regulations with the purpose of incentivizing hotel /motel owners and developers of proposed
hotel/motel uses to develop affordable or workforce housing on parcels of land which are utilized
for or proposed to be utilized for hotel /motel purposes. The proposed text amendment will
encourage the provision of severely needed affordable housing by increasing the effective
density of hotel/motel parcels so that affordable housing may be established on site.
Section 139- 1(5)(a) of the Land Development Regulations currently provides that affordable and
workforce housing do not "count against" the non - residential floor area to be developed or in
existence. The proposed amendment simply extends this rationale to hotel /motel development
because of its commercial nature. While hotel/motel uses are measured in terms of density, and
not non - residential square footage, the public policy justification for the proposed amendment is
the same as the justification for not counting affordable housing against non - residential floor
area: to encourage development of affordable and workforce housing as infill on existing or
proposed commercial properties. Hotel /motel uses, unlike other residential uses which
require /utilize residential density, do not create permanent housing for Monroe County residents.
Just like non - residential uses, hotel /motel uses create a demand for residential housing. Public
policy dictates that because hotel/motel uses generate a demand for affordable housing,
hotel/motel uses should be treated in a similar fashion as non - residential development. This
amendment incentivizes developers to utilize already available land to ameliorate the growing
demand for affordable housing in Monroe County.
The housing crisis for Monroe County residents is, without a doubt, dire. According to the April
2015 Monroe County Workforce Housing Committee Stakeholder Assessment Report (the
"Stakeholder Report"), attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A ", prepared by the
FCRC Consensus Center at Florida State University, there is wide agreement that Monroe
County is experiencing a significant and growing workforce housing crisis with shortages for
both affordable rental and ownership units. See Stakeholder Report, p. 10. In Monroe County at
large in 2013, 51% of households paid more than 30% of income for housing while statewide
that figure is 43 %. More than half of Monroe County renters are cost burdened (pay more than
30% of income for rent). See Stakeholder Report, p. 11. A significant portion of current
workforce housing in Monroe County is rental, and there is a large rental housing deficiency. See
Stakeholder Report, p. 13.
According to Florida Housing data compiled by the University of Florida ( "UF Data "), attached
hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B ", the 2016 median sales price for a single family
home in Monroe County was $575,000.00, compared to a statewide median of $212,000.00.
Monroe County's median gross rent for 2010 2014 was $1,400.00 as compared to a statewide
average of $998.00. Monroe County fair market rent for 2010 — 2014, representing rent for a
typical modest apartment, was $999.00 for a studio apartment, $1,100.00 for a one - bedroom,
00089911 - v4
Ms. Mayte Santamaria
May 22, 2017
Page 4
$1,473.00 for a two - bedroom, $1,828.00 for a three - bedroom, and $2,039.00 for a four - bedroom
unit. See OF Data.
The Proposed Amendment will encourage the development of affordable housing stock in
Monroe County by incentivizing developers and current hoteliers to utilize the currently
unutilized or underutilized portions of proposed projects and existing developments for
affordable housing. The proposed amendment makes it feasible for these economic- drivers to
develop necessary affordable housing with reduced land acquisition and mobilization cost.
The Proposed Amendment encourages the owners /operators of the various previously -
established hotel /motel uses in Monroe County — many of whom operate lodging establishments
developed prior to the implementation of the existing inclusionary housing requirements — to
utilize their currently unutilized or underutilized land in a manner consistent with the highest and
best use to serve the needs of Monroe County.
Consistency with the Monroe County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the Florida Statutes,
and Principles for Guiding Development
A. The Proposed Amendment implements and is consistent with the following Goals,
Objectives and Policies of the Monroe County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Specifically, the amendment furthers:
Goal 101: Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life,
ensure the safety of County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources.
Goal 102: Monroe County shall direct future growth to lands which are intrinsically most
suitable for development and shall encourage conservation and protection of
environmentally sensitive lands.
Goal 601: Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to facilitate access by
residents to adequate and affordable housing that is safe, decent, and structurally sound,
and that meets the needs of the population based on type, tenure characteristics, unit size
and individual preferences.
Policy 601.1.4: All affordable housing projects which receive development benefits from
Monroe County, including but not limited to ROGO allocation award(s) reserved for
affordable housing, maximum net density, or donations of land, shall be required to
maintain the project as affordable for a period of 99 years pursuant to deed restrictions or
other mechanisms specified in the Land Development Code, and administered by Monroe
County or the Monroe County Housing Authority.
00089911 - v4
Ms. Mayte Santamaria
May 22, 2017
Page 5
Policy 601.1.9: Monroe County shall maintain land development regulations which may
include density bonuses, impact fee waiver programs, and other possible regulations to
encourage affordable housing.
Objective 601.2: Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to encourage
housing of various types, sizes and price ranges to meet the demands of current and
future residents.
B. The Proposed Amendment is consistent with Florida Statutes
There are no provisions of the Florida Statutes inconsistent with the proposed
Amendment.
C. The amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the
Florida Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes. The Proposed Amendment
specifically furthers the following Principles (Bolded):
For the purposes of reviewing the consistency of the adopted plan, or any amendments to
that plan, with the principles for guiding development, and any amendments to the
principles, the principles shall be construed as a whole and specific provisions may not be
construed or applied in isolation from the other provisions.
(a) Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development
so that local government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of
critical state concern designation.
(b) Protecting shoreline and marine resources, including mangroves, coral reef
formations, seagrass beds, wetlands, fish and wildlife, and their habitat.
(c) Protecting upland resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands,
native tropical vegetation (for example, hardwood hammocks and pinelands), dune ridges
and beaches, wildlife, and their habitat.
(d) Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through
sound economic development.
(e) Limiting the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the
Florida Keys.
(f) Enhancing natural scenic resources, promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural
environment, and ensuring that development is compatible with the unique historic
character of the Florida Keys.
00089911 - v4
Ms. Mayte Santamaria
May 22, 2017
Page 6
(g) Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys.
(h) Protecting the value, efficiency, cost - effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and
proposed major public investments, including:
1. The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities;
2. Sewage collection, treatment, and disposal facilities;
3. Solid waste treatment, collection, and disposal facilities;
4. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities;
5. Transportation facilities;
6. Federal parks, wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries;
7. State parks, recreation facilities, aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned
properties;
8. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co -op; and
9. Other utilities, as appropriate.
(i) Protecting and improving water quality by providing for the construction, operation,
maintenance, and replacement of stormwater management facilities, central sewage
collection; treatment and disposal facilities; and the installation and proper operation and
maintenance of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems.
0) Ensuring the improvement of nearshore water quality by requiring the construction
and operation of wastewater management facilities that meet the requirements of ss.
381.0065(4)(1) and 403.086(l 0), as applicable, and by directing growth to areas served by
central wastewater treatment facilities through permit allocation systems.
(k) Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of
the Florida Keys.
(1) Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of
the Florida Keys.
(m) Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the
event of a natural or manmade disaster and for a post disaster reconstruction plan.
(n) Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida
Keys and maintaining the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource.
Pursuant to Section 380.0552(7) Florida Statutes, the proposed amendment is consistent
with the Principles for Guiding Development as a whole and is not inconsistent with any
Principle.
00099911 - v4
Ms. Mayte Santamaria
May 22, 2017
Page 7
Changed Projections, Assumptions and New Issues
The Board of County Commissioners may consider an amendment if the change is based on one
or more factors, including changed projections and assumptions regarding public service needs
and demographic trends along with new issues. The data cited in the "Reason for Proposed Text
Amendment" Section of this memorandum, above, support that there is a significant and growing
shortage of affordable workforce housing, both rental and ownership, which needs to be
addressed.
Per the Stakeholder Report attached hereto as Exhibit "A ", Monroe County faces the quadruple
impact of high land values, land limited by geographic and environmental features, housing
supply limited by controlled growth (the Rate of Growth Ordinance), and a tourism economy
with a prevalence of lower paying service - sector employment. The data clearly shows that the
growing lack of affordable housing needs to be addressed. The Proposed Amendment will assist
this goal by providing incentive for developers of hotel /motel uses and owner /operators of
current hotels /motels to develop affordable housing in suitable, currently underutilized or
unutilized areas.
No Adverse Community Change
There will be no adverse change to unincorporated Monroe County at large if the text
amendment is approved. As a general principle, areas suitable for hotel /motel development are
suitable for affordable residential use. Properties nearby proposed affordable housing
development under the Proposed Amendment will not be adversely impacted, as any
development of affordable housing under the Proposed Amendment will still be required to be an
authorized use in the applicable land use (zoning) district. Furthermore, all such development
will be required to comply with level of service, concurrency, and performance standards as set
forth in the Land Development Code.
Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, Applicant requests consideration and adoption of the Proposed
Amendment. Thank you for your consideration and assistance, and please feel free to contact me
with any questions.
Sincerely,
Barton W. Smith, Esq.
0008991 1 - v4
00089911 - V2
EXHIBIT A
cu
tm
r _
0
as
cu
0
4=
cu
tm
tm
as
E
E
ca
0
CL
0
CL
as
E
L)
L)
0
CN
iTL
CL
.2
E
bd
cu
CL
a
4)
E
.a
0
cu
MONROE COUNTY WOR KF ORCE HOUSING
STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT REPORT
APRIL 2015
Monroe County
Affordable Housing Permits
Lower Keys
CP
0 00 0 0
V
A 1. l� M. e Hy - G rc er. - , oe part,,
F
Upper Keys
o AHordahle Housing Permits
[_ Mile Markers
S
Assessment Report Prepared by:
Robert Jones, Director
FCRC Consensus Center, Florida State Uniersity
STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS i
Contents................................................................................... ............................... 2
Executive .................................................................... ............................... 3
I. ASSESSMENT SCOPE AND ORGANIZATION ............................. .............................10
II. WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY- CONTEXT ........ .............................11
III. WORKFORCE HOUSING CHALLENGES- IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES ..............14
A. WORKFORCE HOUSING STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES COMMON THEMES .............................14
B. WORKFORCE HOUSING STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES COMMON ISSUES .... .............................15
C. STAKEHOLDER IDEAS AND ISSUES- MATRIX ...................................................... .............................16
D. STAKEHOLDER IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES ........................................................ .............................22
1. County Government Perspective and Ideas ................................................... .............................22
2. Municipal Government Perspectives and Ideas ....................
3. State Government Ideas and Perspectives ...................................................... .............................26
4. Education Ideas and Perspectives ...................
5. Development Ideas and Perspectives .............................................................. .............................28
6. Lodging, Hospitality and Tourist Development Ideas and Perspectives ... .............................29
7. Business Sector Ideas and Perspectives ........................................................... .............................31
8. Non Profit Sector Ideas and Perspectives ...................................................... .............................34
9. Military Sector Ideas and Perspectives ............................................................ .............................37
IV. WORKFORCE HOUSING PROCESS- STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES ................38
A. INFORMATION NEEDED TO INFORM CONSENSUS BUILDING ON WORKFORCE HOUSING ........38
B. WORKFORCE HOUSING PROCESS- STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES .................. .............................42
V. WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY- -NEXT STEPS ... .............................44
Appendices
1. List of Interviews /Meetings .................................................................................. .............................45
2. Affordable Housing Advisory Committee Ordinance ...................................... .............................48
3. Workforce Housing Assessment Background Papers ....................................... .............................50
4. Workforce Housing Roundtable Summary of Comments, August 2014 ......................... .. ......... 51
5. Public Comment Email ......................................................................................... .............................56
6. "Affordable Housing White Paper ", September 2014, Donald Craig, AICP Director of
Planning & Nicole Malo, AICP Planner, City of Key West ............................. .............................57
7. Draft Sample Advisory Committee Procedures and Protocols ....................... .............................58
8. Information on the FCRC Consensus Center, FSU .......................................... .............................68
ti- tontoe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015
MONROE COUNTY WORKFORCE HOUSING
ST AKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT REPORT- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Monroe County faces the quadruple impact of high land values, land limited by geographic and
environmental features, housing supply limited by controlled growth (the Rate of Growth Ordinance) and a
tourism economy with a prevalence of lower paying service- sector employment. In August 2014 the Monroe
County Commission approved a stakeholder assessment effort, to be conducted by the FCRC Consensus
Center at Florida State University (Consensus Center), to solicit perspectives and ideas on workforce housing
challenges and on whether a county -wide consensus building effort should be convened to address the
complex issues surrounding workforce housing in the Florida Keys.
This assessment report sets out the context for addressing workforce housing issues and used interviews,
meetings and review of data and documents to assess stakeholder perspectives on the County's workforce
housing challenges. These perspectives include county, city, regional, state and federal government levels,
housing and tourist development leaders in Monroe County, the business and tourist community and non-
profit community and civic organizations. used on this stakeholder input, the assessment report summarizes
the themes, concerns, issues, and interests that stakeholders believe ought to be considered in addressing
workforce housing needs in Monroe County. (,See below)
The workforce housing affordability crisis in the Florida Keys identified by the Monroe County Commission
in 2014 is real. "Cost- burdened" households pay more than 30% of income for rent or mortgage costs. In
2013, 51% (or 16,849) of Monroe County households pay more than 30% of income for housing while
statewide that figure is 43 %. More than half of Monroe County renters are cost burdened (8,350 of 14,002)
while about 45% of Monroe County homeowners are cost burdened (8,499 of the 18,936).
In November 2014 the United Way of Florida released its report, ALICE (Asset Limited, Income
Constrained, Employed: Study of Financial Hardship, which indicates that nearly half of all Monroe County
households (14,221of 29,241) live above the federal poverty line but still struggle to afford basic expenses
including housing, child care, food, transportation and health care.' The Report also evaluates community
conditions for each of Florida's counties using a weighted "Economic Viability Dashboard" in three core
areas using a scale of 1 (worst) to 100 (best). Monroe County's results area as follows:
Core Areas
Rating
Grade
Housing Affordability (40% )
14 of 100
Poor
j ob 9pportunities 40%
67 of 100
Good
Community Supp 20 %)
48 of 100
Poor
� The Report was initially developed in New Jersey and noNv five other states including Florida, California, Michigan, Indiana and
Connecticut, have used the model and developed reports in 2014.
htt / 1 -bat l.tnta.or�_1/ ctn nnxlC%Z publ icationS /1 x2rtuersupdarc /21115/U1 /stud%- sheds- IiLhi yin a k , orhir , �-fan.zilirs- iIIA]oridIt
2 The Index provides the means to compare counties in Florida and to see changes over time. The Housing Affordability area
includes three key indicators including: the Household Survival Budget (quantifying the cost of the housing, child care, food, health
care, transportation); health insurance; and housing burden. The Job Opportunities area includes three key indicators including:
Income Distribution; Employment Rate; and New Hire Wages. The Community Support area includes three kev indicators:
Violent crime rate; the annual payroll of human services nonprofits per capita; and Access to good basic health care.
1llonroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 3
The findings of all of several recent reports on Monroe County's current housing situation confirm that there
is a significant and growing shortage of affordable workforce housing, both rental and ownership. In addition
there exists a policy gap in that affordable housing for the working and middle classes is largely left to
individual municipalities and counties to deal with.
Over 75 persons participated in the interviews and meetings and identified a range of workforce housing
issues. While some offered perspectives from the same sector, they live and work in different parts of the
Keys and the ideas they offer are not necessarily the same as others sharing that perspective. However, across
the various perspectives the following emerged as six common themes regarding key workforce housing
issues:
1. A Shared vision of success for Workforce Housing in Monroe County
2. Take Action on Workforce Housing
3. Build upon the past affordable housing studies and reports
4. Defining the problem first based on data
5. Seek a balanced package of options as there is no single strategy that will solve the workforce housing
crisis
6. View housing as community infrastructure, like transportation and water supply
Issues generally identified as important from most perspectives included:
1. Addressing the ROGO system and workforce housing, including transfers and fractional ROGOs
2. Density and livable workforce housing
3. Relaxing height restrictions in light of federal flood insurance changes and to create more workforce
housing
4. Monroe Housing Authority role in workforce housing
5. Transportation and its relationship to and role in workforce housing
6. Workforce Housing site identification and audit of publicly owned property.
7. Creation of new workforce housing units that are both affordable and livable with development
incentives and public private partnerships
S. Preservation and maintenance of existing workforce housing and incentives to preserve workforce
housing
9. Related workforce issues due to high cost of housing (insurance, childcare, food insecurity etc.)
10. County, City and state affordable housing policies and regulations including length of deed
restrictions
11, Explore and expand funding sources to expand workforce housing in Monroe County
The Stakeholder Assessment sought to identify how different stakeholders viewed the challenges of
workforce housing facing Monroe County and its residents. The over 50 issues and ideas identified and
summarized from the many interviews and meetings, help to shed light on the complexity of the issues and
on the healthy diversity of views on how to best address the challenges even among those sharing the same
stakeholder perspective. The assessment interviews were conducted with the understanding that the themes
and ideas identified would be shared with the Commission and inform any committee that would engage in
subsequent consensus building on workforce housing solutions. It was also understood that individual views
would not be attributed but the related themes perspectives would be summarized. The report provides
input from following perspectives: County Government; City Government; Education; Development;
Lodging /Hospitality /Tourism; Business; Non Profit; and Military. Over 50 workforce housing ideas and
Afonroc Count}= Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 4
issues were identified in the Assessment from different perspectives in the Following categories:
Overall
Workforce Housing Planning & Zonin
I. No single solution, menu of options
1.
Create a County Workforce Housing Development Plan
2. Build on work to date (studies, task forces, etc.)
2.
Consider adjusting height restrictions to increase
3. Target different levels of workforce to provide
workforce housing
WH
3.
Allow increased density for WH
4. Engage private and public sector employers in
4.
Tax Credit Property Management after 15 yrs.
finding WH solutions
5.
Encourage mixed use
5. Political will to implement solutions
6.
Explore "Micro Housing"
6. Focus on rental housing
7.
Enforce Housing Codes
7. Addressing NIMBY and workforce housing
S.
ROGO Allocations and Transfers, Fractional ROGO
S. Encourage public private partnerships for WH
for WH
9. Encourage WH affordability and livability
9.
ROGO Formula
10. Support living wages in the Keys
10.
Address redevelopment and WH
11, Expand the Keys economy beyond tourism
11.
Encourage commercial construction of WH by reducing
12. Address negative impacts on Keys communities of
impact fee.
transient workforce
12.
Explore and assess the role of Eve-aboard boats in WH
13. Clarifying workforce housing and affordable
13.
Encourage hospitality industry and the commercial
housing definitions
sector to build WH
Workforce Housing Funding
Preserve Existing Workforce Housin
1. Workforce housing site identification and audit
1.
Preserve /maintain affordable units
2. Remedy Sadowski Trust Fund donor inequity
2.
Address "lost" AH /WI - units
3. Land Authority funds for workforce housing
3.
Revisit land trusts as a tool
construction
4.
Provide for "no net loss" principle of affordable &
4. Dedicated local funding for workforce housing
workforce housing in the County housing element
5. Consider inclusionary WH fee
5.
Adopt a "lease form" for local governments owning
6. Address online marketplace for vacation rentals
underlying land for WH
that connects users with property to rent with
6.
Address loss of deed restrictions for AH
users looking to rent the space(e.g. AirBnB) and
7.
Address RV /Trailer Parks as WH and conversion issues
its impact on bed tax revenue
7. Provide assistance to workforce renters (down
p ayment /dep osit)
Workforce Housing & Transportation
Workforce Housing & Related Issues
1, Increase highway capacity to adjust ROGO
1,
Address related issues insurance costs- wind
evacuation formula
2.
Address 2018 FEMA flood insurance issues.
2. Address related issues- Transportation options for
3.
/Address related issues- Daycare
employees
4.
Homelessness & Workforce Housing
3. Address & improve transit issues in the upper and
S.
Protect military buffer areas
lower Keys
6.
Address "food security" (i.e. access b%T all people. at all
tunes to cnouyh food for an acri�•c, l;calulty life) and
workforce housing.
Workforce Housing & Site Identification
Workforce Housing Construction
1. Audit Local Government owned public lands for
1.
Waive building fees for WH
WH
2.
Buy down interest rates for WH projects
2. Re- purpose land owned by local government for
3.
Cut taxing rates on WH
WH
4.
Commercial properties for WH -tax and insurance breaks
3. Focus all 3 -tier properties on WH
Workforce Housing & the Education Sector
1. Engage the school system as largest employer
Improve teacher housing needs data
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015
Monroe County staff has gathered detailed baseline data that included an inventory of affordable and
workforce housing projects completed over the past 2 decades in Monroe County, along with the public
incentives that were made to assist in the housing development. In the course of the assessment interviews
and meetings, various studies and data sources were identified on best practices from other jurisdictions and
ideas developed or considered but not implemented by previous affordable housing task forces. Among the
range of stakeholders interviewed, all expressed the need for a focused and comprehensive county-wide
workforce housing dialogue that involved those with a stake in the outcome. Many believed that such a
committee should develop a package of consensus recommendations, informed by data and the range of
stakeholder and public perspectives, that can provide for both short and longer term actions for the Board of
County Commission's consideration.
While some of those interviewed remained skeptical that there will be sufficient "political will" to implement
the Committee's recommendations as has been the case in the past, many believed that this was an urgent
and timely issue for the Counter to address in light of hotel redevelopment and the economic upturn.
In the Fall of 2014, following the initiation of this Assessment, the Commission re- appointed members to
the existing Affordable Housing Advisory Committee and with the thought of convening and charging them
with addressing workforce housing issues and providing the County Commission with its recommendations.
The reconvened committee would review this assessment report and other data as it addressed its charge. A
workforce housing committee, ad hoc or otherwise, appointed and charged by the County Commission to
address workforce housing issues in the Florida Keys was explored in the assessment interviews. A
significant number of those interviewed applauded the County Commission's action in re- purposing the
existing Affordable Housing Advisory Committee to focus, at least in the short term, on workforce housing.
It was suggested that this approach could provide representation from each District in the County, offer
workforce housing perspectives from the public, private and nonprofit sectors, and minimize confusion and
any duplication of effort that an ad hoc workforce housing committee might create. It was also pointed out
that this charge would be consistent with the Committee's current mission to address affordable housing
opportunities in Monroe County= for both "residents and workforce."
The Commission should review the current Committee appointments to ensure that a balance of workforce
housing stakeholder perspectives are included in its membership. If the Commission charges the Affordable
Housing Advisory Committee to develop consensus recommendations on workforce housing actions for
consideration by the Monroe County BOCC, most stakeholders interviewed suggested there should be a
sufficient range of stakeholder perspectives represented and participating in the consensus building. This
would allow the Committee to develop informed workforce housing consensus findings and
recommendations that stakeholders might support and the County Commission could act upon.
There is a great deal of public and stakeholder interest in the workforce housing issues the Committee will
take up. The membership requirements, as set forth in both Florida statute and the Monroe County
Resolution, do not reference representation of the municipalities in the County, the military, the School
Board and perhaps other organizations impacted by workforce housing policies and programs and with a
stake in contributing to solutions to improve the availability of workforce housing in the Florida Keys.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 6
1.4.a
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015
Packet Pg. 1617
1.4a.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015
s
ca
a�
s
0
m
ca
0
m
a�
s
= a
m
a�
m
r
s
a�
E
s
a�
E
M
U
0
J
G9
N
O
CL
O
i
a
a�
s
r
a�
m
r
m
CL
E
U
U
O
m
LO
I-
9
0
m
U-
s
.
s
m
a
2
U-
r-
0
r
m
Q
CL
Q
s
m
E
ca
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 1618
The format for the Committee meetings should encourage constructive public and stakeholder input. The
Commission might consider charging the Committee with establishing an engagement strategt! to involve a
broader range of stakeholders in their development of findings and recommendations. This might be
accomplished through opportunities for public input during their own meetings, as well as through
Committee sponsored advisory workgroups, joint workshops with municipal taskforces and city
commissions, workshops at key moments in the development of options and recommendations, online
surveys and other techniques.
It was observed by many that an advisory committee developing recommendations on workforce housing
will require dedicated staff, including legal and planning expertise, and facilitation support for the Committee
to do its work expeditiously. This is because of the complexity of the charge, the intense public interest in
the issue, the linkages with other issues and programs and activities in the public, private and non -profit
sectors, and the desire for timely actions to address the current workforce housing challenges.
The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners should review this Assessment Report and charge the
Affordable Housing Committee to focus its efforts in the coming year on workforce housing. With a charge
from the County Commission, the Committee should establish its procedures and approach and a schedule
for meetings that would permit it to deliver back to the BOCC its workforce housing recommendations by
mid -2016. The Committee should consider:
• Developing a shared vision of success;
• Jointly defining the workforce problems faced in the Florida Keys;
• Reviewing the range of issues and options identified in previous studies;
• Reviewing the experience and lessons learned with successful workforce housing projects developed
in the Keys to date;
• Reviewing this Stakeholder Assessment Report; and
• Developing a package of consensus findings and recommended solutions for consideration by the
Monroe County Board of County Commission.
This stakeholder assessment report confirms that there is wide agreement that Monroe County is facing a
significant and growing workforce housing crisis with shortages for both affordable rental and ownership
units. There is also agreement that no single strategy will solve the workforce housing crisis in Monroe
County. Instead the challenge ahead is to craft a balanced package of targeted options that have been refined
through discussion and debate and that can serve as a consensus framework for addressing and
implementing solutions.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 9
MONROE COUNTY WORKFORCE HOUSING
STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT REPORT
ASSESSMENT SCOPE AND ORGANIZATION
Monroe County faces the quadruple impact of high land values, land limited by geographic
and environmental features, housing supply limited by controlled growth (the Rate of
Growth Ordinance) and a tourism economy with a prevalence of lower paying service -- sector
employment. In August 2014 the Monroe County Commission approved a stakeholder
assessment effort, to be conducted by the FCRC Consensus Center at Florida State
University (Consensus Center), to solicit perspectives and ideas on workforce housing
challenges and on whether a county -wide consensus building effort should be convened to
address the complex issues surrounding workforce housing in the Florida Keys.
The 2005 Harvard report, "Strengthening the Workforce and Communities through
Housing Solutions" suggests, solutions to the workforce housing challenge require a broad -
based, proactive approach.' This stakeholder assessment engaged a broad range of public,
private and non profit stakeholders to clarify substantive issues involved, options to
consider, information needed and process and coordination issues.
This assessment report sets out the context for addressing workforce housing issues and
used interviews, meetings and review of data and documents to assess stakeholder
perspectives on the County's workforce housing challenges. These perspectives include
county, city, regional, state and federal government levels, housing and tourist development
leaders in Monroe County, the business and tourist community) and non -profit community
and civic organizations. Based on this stakeholder input, the assessment report summarized
the themes, concerns, issues, and interests that stakeholders believe ought to be considered
in addressing workforce housing needs in Monroe County. The assessment seeks to address
the following questions:
1. What are the range of affordable workforce housing and related issues from the
perspectives of County, City, State and Federal housing and tourist development
leaders, the business and tourist community and the non - profit community and civic
organizations and residents?
2. What are the linkages with development and land use issues, transportation mobility?
3. What interests, organizations and individuals should participate in a stakeholder
county -wide committee process to develop consensus recommendations on
affordable workforce housing issues in Monroe County? How Should the County
convene a stakeholder committee to develop recommendations on workforce
housing in Monroe County and its cities?
4. What is needed in terms of base line current data on workforce housing programs in
3 hrm� bit.] /'I kc rn f n, "By the time a workforce housing affordability problem begins to affect the bottom line, the
forces that contribute to high housing costs have long been in place and are difficult to reverse. For the housing and
business communities to forestall such an outcome, they must establish a working relationship characterized by respect,
trust, and an awareness of each other's interests. They must have access to information about the causes of the
affordability problem and data that demonstrate its effects."
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 10
Monroe County? What information and data on best practices should be considered
in any subsequent stakeholder consensus building process?
II. WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY- CONTEXT
The workforce housing affordability crisis in the Florida Keys identified by the Monroe
Counts= Commission in 2014 is real. "Cost- burdened" households pay more than 30% of
income for rent or mortgage costs. In 2013, 51% (or 16,849) of Monroe County households
pay more than 30% of income for housing while statewide that figure is 43 %. More than
half of Monroe County renters are cost burdened (8,350 of 14,002) while about 45% of
Monroe County homeowners are cost burdened (8,499 of the 18,936).
In November 2014 the United Way of Florida released its report, ALICE (Asset Limited,
Income Constrained, Employed: Study of Financial Hardship, which indicates that nearly
half of all Monroe County households (14,221of 29,241) live above the federal poverty line
but still struggle to afford basic expenses including housing, child care, food, transportation
and health care.' The Report also evaluates community= conditions for each Florida county
using a weighted "Economic Viability Dashboard" in three core areas employing a scale of 1
(worst) to 100 (best).` Monroe County's results area as follows:
Core Areas
Rating
Grade
Housing Affordability 40%
14 of 100
Poor
Job Opportunities (40 %)
67 of 100
Good
Community Support (20 %)
48 of 100
Poor
4 Workforce housing can refer to any form of housing, including ownership of single or multi - family homes, as
well as occupation of rental units. Workforce housing is generally understood to mean affordable housin"I for
households with earned income that is insufficient to secure duality housing in reasonable proximity to the
workplace. The term "workforce" is meant to connote those who are gainfully employed, a group of people
who are not typically understood to be the target of affordable housing programs. Workforce housing, then,
implies an altered or expanded understanding of affordable housing. Workforce housing is commonly targeted
at "essential workers" in a community i.e. police officers, firemen, teachers, nurses, medical personnel.
However resort communities generally define "essential" more broadly to include service workers, as they often
are characterized by high real estate costs and a high number of low- paying service jobs essential to the local
tourism economy.
The Report was initially developed in New Jersey and now five other states including Florida, California,
Michigan, Indiana and Connecticut, have used the model and developed reports in 2014.
https: / /VWyv .ftbatlanta.nr� conimde\ / pub licati o ns /partnetsupdate /2t 117 /01lstudc- sheds - lid >ht- on uorl.in
to 11ll11CS- 111- t�UridB
6 The Index provides the means to compare counties in Florida and to see changes over time. The Housing
Affordability area includes three key indicators including: the Household Survival Budget (quantifying the cost
of the housing, child care, food, health care, transportation); health insurance; and housing burden. The Job
Opportunities area includes three key indicators including: Income Distribution; Employment Rate; and New
Hire Wages. The Community Support area includes three key indicators: Violent crime rate; the annual payroll
of human services nonprofits per capita; and Access to good basic health care.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 11
KEY FACTS AND ALICE STATISTICS FOR MONROE COUNTY
(Frain the ALICE Floida Repml. Stud3r of Finau al Hardship, Fall, 2014, Appendix H)
Big Cop itt Key /Monroe County
Population
Households
Poverty %
ALICE
%
Above ALICE
Threshold %
Unemploy
ment Rate
Housing Burden over
35% Owner
Housing Burden over
35% Renter
2016
833
12%
35%
53%
9%
55%
72%
Big Pine Ke /Monroe Coun
Population
Households
Pover�' %
ALICE
%
Above ALICE
Threshold %
Unemploy-
ment Rate
Housing Barden over
35% Owner
Housiy Burden over
35% Renter
3777
1619
10%
35%
56%
4%
44%
42%
Key Largo/Monroe Count
Population
Households
Poverty %
ALICE
%
Above ALICE
Threshold %
Une»lploy-
ment Rate
Housing Burden over
35% Owner
Housing Burden over
35% Renter
11409
4517
15%
38%
47%
9%
44%
57%
Key West
Population
Households
Pover-t3r %
ALICE
%
Above ALICE
Threshold %,
Unerrlploy-
ment Rate
Housing Burden over
35% Owner
Housing Burden over
35% Renter
24870
9322
9%
35%
56%
4%
44%
68%
Lower Ke s /Monroe Count
Population
Households
Pover�� ° /o
AL ICE
Above ALICE
Threshold %
Uneruaploy-
I uvent Rate
Housing 13rrrderr over
35% Orvrrer
Iloursing Burden over
35% Kenter
10394
4314
8%
2 3%
62 %
5%
42 %
56 %
Marathon
Population
Households
Nmro %
ALICE
%
A15ove ALICE
Threshold %
Unemploy
jnent Kate
Housing Burden over
35% Oivner
housing Burden over
35% Renter
8389
3371
14%
41%
45%
9%
40%
65%
Middle Keys /Monroe County
Population
Households
Pover %
ALICE
%
AboveALICE
Threshold %
Unemp1q)!-
ment Rate
Housing Burden over
35 %, Orvner
Housing Burden over
35% Renter
9731
4068
13%
40%
47%
10%
42%
64%
North Key Largo/ ontoe n ty
Populations
Households
Pover't %
ALICE
%
Above ALICE
Threshold %
Urlemploy-
ment Kate
HouSZYlg Burden over
35% Oavner
Housing Bmiden over
35% Renter
1166
510
11%
20%
69%
4%
36%
25%
Stock Island/ Monroe Coun
Population
Households
Pover�jr %
ALICE
Above ALICE
Threshold % I
Urrejnploy
ment Rate
Housing Burden over
35% Orvner
Housing Burrden over
35% Renter
3736
1111
14%
62o /a
24%
8%
53%
69%
Tavernier/ Monroe Coun
Population
Households
Povert31 %
ALICE
%
Above ALICE
Threshold %
Unemploy
ment I�aae
Housing Barden over
35% Owner
Housing Burden over
35% Renter
2491
953
6%
46%
48%
7%
46%
37%
Upper Keys/Monroe Coun
Population
Households
Pover�r %
ALICE
AboveALICE
Threshold %
Unernploy-
ment Rate
Housing Burden over
35% Ommer
Housing Burden over
35% Renter
21234
8633
13%
37%
50%
9%
43%
54%
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 12
The findings of all of several recent reports on Monroe County's current housing situation
confirm that there is a significant and growing shortage of affordable workforce housing,
both rental and ownership. In addition there exists a policy gap in that affordable housing
for the working and middle classes is largely left to individual municipalities and counties to
deal with.
In Monroe County an hourly wage needed to afford a m7o- bedroom FMR is $26.27 /hour.'
In order not to pay more than 30% of family income on housing, a household must earn
$4,553 monthly or $54,640 annually.
The findings of all of the reports on Monroe County's current housing situation confirm
that there is a significant and growing shortage of affordable workforce housing, both rental
and ownership. A significant portion of the current workforce housing in Monroe County is
rental and there is a large rental housing deficit. As is the case throughout Florida, there has
been increase in the demand for rental housing in Florida following the great recession and
subsequent housing crisis, particularly among younger households and families with children.
Statewide, the percent of households renting increased from 29.4 percent in 2007 to 34.4
percent in 2012 (American Community Survey, 2012; Shimberg Center for Housing Studies,
University of Florida, 2013)." The Shimberg Center has found that affordable rental
shortages are most pronounced in southeast Florida. (SCHS, 2013).
In an Affordable Housing Solutions White Paper (October 2014)' Donald Craig, Planning
Director for the City of Key West, projected a deficit of amore than 6,500 units of
affordable housing units in the City and characterized the affordability challenge as follows:
"The City's Comprehensive Plan identified the City of Key West median household
income as $52,004 while the average annual wages earned by a worker in the City are
approximately $37,844 indicating that by standard guidelines for mortgage lending at the
median level, a home should cost no more than $166,012, or three times the median
income. This is clearly inconsistent with actual cost of housing in the City, when the Key
West Board of Realtors reports that at the end of July 2014 the median sales prices of
162 single family homes sold in the preceding 7 months was $630,000 and the median
sales prices for Condo /Townhouses was $368,000. Clearly persons and families making
the median income or average wage cannot afford for -sale housing, even if such were
being built. As to rental housing, the situation is not better. Even though dated and most
assuredly higher, the 2010 reported median gross monthly rent in the City was $1,359. In
order to be affordable to the average wage earner in the City, the monthly rent should be
no more than $946. Rent such as this is not available in the City at this point and time
and results in workers sharing housing in increasing numbers, or paying 40 -50% of their
income for housing."
7 "Out of Reach 2014: Florida ", I I. , National Low Income. }-lousing Coalition
8 Affordable Housing Whitt Paper- Donald Craig, AICP Director of Planning & Nicole Maio AICP,Planner, City of
Key West. /; lc i 'meetii� sf20i4 /If�?$)I_A Cite Commksion 1
LI \lccttn, Agenda FU11 l)cMil.l
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 13
The 2015 Home Matters Report from the Florida Housing Coalition' confirms what other
reports have found regarding rapid increases in rents for vacant units on the market while
Florida's home ownership has declined steadily since its peak in 2007. Tighter mortgage
lending standards, rising mortgage interest rates and fees, and a high percentage of cash sales
have squeezed many low and moderate income homebuyers out of the market.
There currently exists a policy gap to fund workforce housing development. Federal
programs through HUD or state governments are generally targeted towards low- income
programs designed for people that make less than 60% of Area Median Income (AMI). The
Low - Income Housing Tax Credit, which mainly spurs development of rental properties, is
an example of this. Affordable housing for the working and middle classes has been largely
left to individual municipalities and counties to deal with.
III. WORKFORCE HOUSING CHALLENGES- STAKEHOLDER
IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES
A. Critical Affordable Workforce Housing Common Themes
The over 75 persons participating in the interviews and meetings identified a range of
workforce housing issues. While some offered a perspective from the same sector, they lived
and worked in different parts of the Keys and the ideas they offered were not necessarily the
same as others sharing that perspective. However, across the various perspectives the
following six common themes regarding key workforce housing issues emerged:
1. A Shared vision of success for Workforce Housing in Monroe County will be
important to guide and gauge the menu of strategies and actions needed to address
workforce housing.
2. Action orientation. All acknowledge the workforce housing context is complex and
challenging but needs immediate focus and attention and that addressing gaps in
workforce housing throughout the Florida Keys will require immediate and longer
term actions, even if those interviewed had differences in emphasis on those options
and actions.
3. Build upon the past affordable housing studies and reports. Many agreed with
the following statement, "The comprehensive studies, recommendations and
published works on the topic do not need to be repeated. The metrics of this
problem are well known and documented. The dynamics and facts have changed
little over the years."
4. Define the problem(s) first. There needs to be a careful effort to define the shared
workforce housing problem facing Monroe County in a multifaceted way (different
levels and needs of workers, rental vs. ownership, different locations in the Keys)
and then based on data and knowledge, move to identify, craft and implement
"solutions.
` � Ittt l ri/ iscuu .euinit�huusing;clt " h��me ir�.itters rep��rt II?.2U1� tin ,tl,
14
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015
5. No single strategy. There does not appear to be a single strategy to pursue but
rather a menu of combined strategies to address the workforce housing challenges in
the Florida Keys. Any committee should seek to develop a balanced package of both
short term and longer --term strategies and actions that are targeted to addressing the
needs of different sections of the workforce and to different parts of Monroe
County.
6. Housing as community infrastructure. Given its importance to the local
economy, the County should consider workforce housing as it considers other
critical infrastructure such as transportation and water supply. Workforce housing
should receive the policy, planning and Financial attention that other areas of local
infrastructure receive. The County should seek to better integrate the housing
element with other plan elements such as the future land use, public facilities,
transportation and capital improvements.
B. Critical Affordable Workforce Housing Common Issues
Issues generally identified as important to address from most perspectives included:
1. Addressing the ROGO system and workforce housing, including transfers and
fractional ROGOs
2. Density and livable workforce housing
3. Relaxing height restrictions in light of Federal flood insurance changes and to create
more workforce housing
4. Strengthen Monroe County Housing Authority's role in workforce housing
5. Address transportation and its relationship to and role in workforce housing
6. Update Monroe County's workforce housing site identification and audit of publicly
owned property
7. Create new workforce housing units that are both affordable and livable with
development incentives and public private partnerships
8. Preserve and maintain existing workforce housing and provide incentives to preserve
workforce housing
9. Address related workforce issues due to high cost of housing (insurance, childcare,
food insecurity etc.)
10. Review and consider changes in the County, City and state affordable housing
policies and regulations including length of deed restrictions
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 15
11. Explore and expand funding sources to expand workforce housing in Monroe
Countv
C. Stakeholder Ideas and Perspectives on Workforce Housing Matrix
The Stakeholder Assessment sought to identify how different stakeholder perspectives
viewed the challenges of workforce housing facing Monroe County and its residents. The
over 50 issues and ideas identified and summarized from the many interviews and meetings,
help to shed light on the complexity of the issues and on the healthy diversity of views on
how to best address the challenges. The assessment interviews were conducted with the
understanding that the themes and ideas identified would be shared with the Commission
and inform any committee that would engage in subsequent consensus building on
workforce housing solutions. It was also understood that individual views would not be
attributed but related perspectives would be summarized.
Workforce housing ideas and issues identified in the Assessment from different perspectives
and included issues displayed in the matrix below in the following nine categories:
1. Overall (12 Issues /Ideas)
2. Workforce Housing Funding (7 Issues /Ideas)
3. Workforce Housing Planning, Zoning & Enforcement (13 Issueslldeas)
4. Workforce Housing & Transportation (4 lssates/ldeas)
5. Workforce Housing & Site Identification (3 Issues /Ideas)
6. Workforce Housing Construction (4 Issues /Ideas)
7. Workforce Housing - Preserve Existing (7lssues /Ideas)
S. Workforce Housing & the Education Sector (2 Issues /Ideas)
9. Workforce Housing & Related Issues (G Issues /Ideas)
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 16
ISSUES /IDEAS
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES ✓ =Noted as is.tare /idea in tl)e iiateaxie)os
County
City
State
Edueation
Development
Lodging /Hospitality
Business
Non - Profit
Military
Tourism
OVERALL
1. 'No single solution, menu of
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
o bons
i
2. Build on work to date
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
{studies, task forces, etc.
3. Target different IeVelS of
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
workforce to provide WH
4. Engage private and public
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
�/
�/
sector employers in finding
WH solutions
5. Political to implement
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
solutions
G. Focus on rental housing
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
7 . Addressing NIMBY and
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
workforce housin
3. Encourage public ptivate
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
P artnerships for WH
. I7ncouragc WTI affordability
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
and liv abilin
U. Support living wages in the
✓
Keys
11. Lxpand the Keys economy
✓
✓
✓
beyond tourism
12. Address negative impacts on
✓
✓
Keys communities of
transient workforce
3. Collect data on yk- i -I
✓
✓
✓
✓
provided by hoteliers
C
CU
tm
r _
0
as
72
CU
0
CU
tm
a�
C
4)
E
�8
E
1�
�9
tlt
0
CL
0
CL
m
C
Qy
43
E
L)
L)
0
Ln
8
CN
M
CL
E
�C
bd
CU
E
L)
CU
ISSUES /IDEAS
I STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES
County
City
1
State
Education
1
Development
LadginglHaspitality
�
Business
Non - Profit
Military
Tourism
WORKFORCE. HOUSING FUNDING
14.\' nrkforce housing site
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
identification and audit
15. Changing the Tourist
✓
✓
✓
✓
Development Council (TDC)
law to allow those dollars to
be used for affordable
housing develo mcnt.
10. Remedy Sadokvski Trust
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Fund donor ineq
17. Land Authority funds for
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
workforce housing
construction
S. Dedicated Incal funding for
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
workforce housing
9. Consider inclusionary WH
✓
✓
✓
✓
fcc
0. Address Air B &B and
✓
impact on bed tat revenue
1. Provide assistance to
✓
✓
✓
workforce renters (down
payment /dc osit
WORKFORCE HOUSING- PLANNING, ZONING, ENFORCEMENT
2. Crcatc a County Workforce
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Housing Devclo ment Plan
3. Consider ndjusting height
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
restrictions for more Wi-1
4, Allow increased density for
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
�/
WH
5. Tax Credit Property
✓
✓
✓
Mang entent after 15 years
6. Encourage mixed use
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Monroe County Workforcc i lousing* Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 I
CU
tm
r _
0
as
72
CU
0
CU
tm
tm
a�
as
E
�8
E
�9
t�}
0
CL
0
CL
Qd
43
E
U
L)
0
8
Q�
U_
2
q9
E
r _
CU
48
CL
a
4)
E
48
CU
ISSUES /IDEAS
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES
County
City
State
Educatio
Development
Lodgingl Hospitality
Business
Non-
Military
n
Tourism
Pro
7. Enforce FIousing Codes
✓
✓
✓
8. Explore "Micro Housing"
✓
✓
✓
9. ROGO Allocations and
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Transfers, Fractional ROGO
0. ROGO Formula
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
1. Address redevelopment and
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
WH
2.Encourage commercial
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
construction of wl1 by
reducing impact tee.
3. Explore the role of live-
✓
✓
✓
aboard boats in WH
4. Encourage hospitality
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
industry to build WH
WORKFORCE HOUSING & TRANSPORTATION
35.Tncrease highway capacity to
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
adjust ROGO evacuation
formula
6.Acidress related issues-
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Transportation options for
employees
7, Address transit issues in the
✓
✓
✓
✓
upper Kc ys
8. Address & improve transit
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
issues in the lower Keys
WORKFORCE HOUSING & SITE IDENTIFICATION
9. Rc- purposc land owned by
✓
✓
✓
✓
local government for WH
0. Focus all 3 -tier propertics on
✓
XH
1lonroc Cuunte Workfurce Housing Stakeholder Assessmcnt Report, April 2015 19
05
tM
0
M
as
72
CU
0
CU
tM
tM
a�
Q�
E
�8
E
�9
t1I
0
CL
0
CL
Qd
43
E
L)
L)
0
Ln
8
04
Q�
M
2
CL
a9
E
r—
CU
48
Qd
E
48
CU
ISSUES /IDEAS
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES
County
City
State
Education
Development
Lodging /Hospitality
Business
Non-
Military
Tourism
Profit
1. Audit local Government
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
owned pubhc lands for WH
WORKFORCE HOUSING —CONSTRUCTION
t 2. Waive building fees for WH
✓
✓
✓
✓
3. Buy down interest rates for
✓
✓
WH projects
4. Cut taxing rates on 1W Fl
✓
5. Commercial properties for
✓
✓
✓
WH -tas and insurance
breaks
WORKFORCE HOUSING — PRESERVE EXISTING WH
G. Preserve /maintain
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
�/
�/
affordahle units
7. Address `lost" AH /\W'H
✓
✓
units
8, Revisit land trusts as a tool
V
✓
✓
9. Provide for "no act loss" of
✓
✓
affordable & WH in County
housing clement
0. Adopt a "lease form" for
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
local governments owning
undurl =in r land for WH
1. Address loss of deed
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
restrictions for AH
2. Address RAJ /Trailer Parks as
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
WH and conversion issues
WORKFORCE HOUSING —EDUCATION
3. fsngage the school system as
✓
✓
✓
lar gest employer in WH
4. Improve teacher housing
✓
needs data collection
Monroe County lkorkforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 20
CU
0
M
as
72
CU
0
CU
tM
a�
Q�
E
�8
E
�9
t�}
0
CL
CL
43
E
L)
CJ
0
Ln
8
04
Q�
M
CL
q9
E
r_
CU
48
Q,#
E
48
CU
ISSUES /IDEAS
STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES
tc,zen y
City
State
Education
Development
Lodging /Hospitality
Business
Non-
Military
Touri m
Profit
WORKFORCE HOUSING — RELATED ISSUES
5. Address related issues
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
insurance costs- «ind
6. Address 2018 FEXIA flood
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
insurance issues.
5 7. Address related issues-
✓
✓
Da 'care
8. Flomelessness & Workforce
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Housin
). Protect militan buffer areas
✓
✓
0. Address "food security" and
✓
W H
iMonroc Counts' Workforce Housing Stakeholder ,- Report, April 2015 21
CU
0
as
72
CU
0
CU
tm
a�
as
E
�8
E
�9
f�}
0
CL
0
43
E
U
CJ
0
8
04
M
2
CL
a9
E
CU
48
Qd
E
48
CU
D. Stakeholder Ideas and Perspectives on Workforce Housing
Over 75 persons participated in the interviews and meetings and identified a range of workforce
housing issues. Below is a compilation summary of the input received from individuals representing
different sectors (public, private and non - profit) and residing in different parts of Monroe County.
1. County Government- Ideas and Perspectives
Build on affordable housing work to date
• We need to understand and build on what's been learned from various task
forces and studies and apply to the current workforce housing situation in the
Keys. Review what incentives are in ordinances and how have they worked. How
do we retool to work better. What about inclusionan, zoning? What about
density bonuses and density waivers? What they are how they work. Homer to
retool to work better. What doesn't work.
• Come up to speed on what was done previously so we know where things were
when walked away.
No silver bullet, no easy fix
• We need a balanced menu of options. Acknowledge the broad range of different
of solution and levels of housing,
• There is no easy fix, no one way to handle this problem.
Workforce Housing Shortages
• We are short over 6000 units and under ROGO we will get 700 over the next 10
years. That does not come close to solving the problem.
• The Affordable Housing Committee should focus initially on workforce.
• We are short 6,800 units of work- force housing. This is a crisis and housing is
the most expensive item on the County's list.
• Housing affordability in the Keys includes insurance, the cost of food and the
cost of daycare as well as housing.
Rental workforce housing focus
• Our most critical need is in lower income and service ranges and we should
focus especially on rentals for this segment of the workforce.
• 98% of the residents of county -run public housing is workforce housing for
working individuals (with the exception of the elderly and disabled). Rent is
capped to 30% of household income and the remaining amount is subsidized.
Windstorm and Flood Insurance Rates
• The current windstorm and flood insurance situation is huge affecting all
residents not just lower income.
• If you can't pay cash, you need insurance to secure a bank loan.
• FIRM- Fair insurance rates for Monroe- is engaged in grass roots advocacy work.
• The Federally subsidized program flood insurance program was amended and
will set a new basis for Florida insurance rates, setting the stage for immediate
dramatic increases flood insurance rates for both residential and commercial
properties.
County growth management and affordable housing.
• Should affordable housing be part of the County growth management function
which is built more to slow growth or placed elsewhere with good staff support
to allow it to be more active in identifying parcels and developers in getting the
)ob done?
Empower and support the Affordable Housing Committee
• The Committee needs to consider a menu of recommended consensus
workforce housing solutions as a package for the County Commission to
consider and implement.
Protect and support the Committee's affordable housing staff.
• In the past considering the complex incentives and transactions for developers to
build affordable housing has opened staff to attack by those opposing
development in general. It has been a very public and vitriolic situation where
staff have been personally attacked.
Site Identification.
• We should identify every piece of county property that is vacant, demolished, big
enough for affordable housing and zoned properly.
Preserve and maintain affordable units.
• We've lost some affordable housing that was bought at low rates and sold at
market rate and restrictions were ignored. We have to pay attention so games are
not played with this and we lose these units.
Mixed Use.
• We should encourage this but it has not caught on except in Key West.
• We should explore mixed use and mixed income levels vs. low income property
pro)ects makes for better self policing and safer and more livable communities.
• The only exception to this is tax credit properties where everyone is low income
with no one is over 60% ANII.
Address Management on Tax Credit Properties after 15 years.
• For the first 15 years, the developer is liable and responsible to maintain the tax
credits and the housing. After the 15"' year property management tends to
deteriorate as less cash is devoted to upkeep.
Consider allowing Land Authority bed tax funds for construction.
• Currently they can only use the funding for land acquisition.
• Consider changing the Tourist Development Council (TDC) law to allow those
dollars to be used for affordable housing development.
Height Restrictions.
• Should be open to relaxing this where this could produce more workforce
housing.
• Consider handling this on a site specific basis.
• There are areas in town where building higher would not block views. The City
of Key West would have the capacity to implement this although it would first
have to be approved by referendum.
Explore Micro Housing.
• This is being implemented in cities such as New York. It might be applied in
cities in the Keys to cut down on the commute time.
• Note that 1— bedroom units are the shortest in supply for the public housing and
tend to be occupied longer, usually by elderly and disabled.
Enforce Housing Codes.
Nfonroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 23
• Enforce housing codes in terms of illegal multiple occupancy.
ROGO
• ROGO allocation system for permits early on effectively eliminated affordable
housing construction. Three things need to come together for successful
workforce housing: funding, available land and allocations. However these have
not coincided. Years ago funding was available but land and allocation were not.
Hospitality Industry and Workforce Housing.
• The industry should step up and participate in efforts to provide more affordable
workforce housing. Some are, others should.
• Some wonder why County taxes would be used to subsidize the hotels'
workforce housing. Hotels should do more.
• We should collect data on what hoteliers are doing in providing workforce
housing for their employees.
Local Dedicated Funding Source.
• We need a local dedicated funding source (sales tax, "sin" tax, etc.) that can
support the construction of workforce housing not just land acquisition.
Address Sadowski Trust Fund Donor Inequity.
• Monroe County contributes 60% and gets back 8 %. This should be addressed
when funding resumes.
AddressNIMBY
• Historically there has been community reactions to the old low income projects.
This may continue to be an issue.
Related Affordability Issues
• Insurance and Day Care can figure in challenges for workers in terms of costs on
Light family budgets.
• Many work 2 -3 service jobs to be able to afford housing and other costs such as
food.
• The "situationally" homeless are part of the workforce housing puzzle in
Monroe County.
Hurricanes and Workforce Housing.
• In the last hurricanes in the Keys transportation from Miami stopped and
restaurant and lodging businesses in the Upper Keys had to shut their doors for
lack of employees.
2. Municipal Government- Ideas and Perspectives
Target the Levels of Workforce to Serve
' We need to define more clearly what kind(s) of workforce housing we want for
the community. Hourly wage earners may always be renters in the Florida Keys.
There is a shortage of decent, reasonably priced, available housing, especially
one- bedroom rentals.
Engage Employers
• We need the businesses in Monroe County with the different types of employees
(hourly, salaried) to be at the table and part of the solution. Hotels have the
highest occupancy- rate and the most profits of any place in the country. They
have begun to help with workforce housing and they should continue to do
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 24
more.
Vacation rentals
• We need to address this challenging issue and its impact on workforce housing in
the current marketplace.
Height restrictions
• Ease height restrictions where there aren't view issues to allow for more
workforce housing.
Mixed use.
• Seek more mixed uses with the school board and other public properties.
Land Acquisition
' Focus land acquisition on workforce housing properties.
Focus on Redevelopment
• Key West is nearing build out and most construction is redevelopment and
remodeling.
Loss of Deed Restrictions
• Address and audit the Loss of Deed Restrictions. ( "Of the total 1,089 affordable
units, 223 are expected to have their deed restrictions expire, or have expired by
the end of 2015." (See Appendix #b).
"No net loss" of existing workforce housing
• Amend the Comprehensive Plan's housing element so that future development
will result in "no net loss" of existing workforce /affordable rental housing for
households earning 80% or less than the area mean income.
High land values limit tax credit funded affordable units
• Difficult to both finance and construct units at any level except at the 60% of
median through heavily subsidized tax credit funding. Lacy of reasonably priced
land has meant few of these projects have been built.
• In the City of Key West, its annual allocation of 91 affordable housing BIAS
units.
Re- purpose land owned by local government
• Land owned by the county should be re- purposed for affordable and workforce
housing.
Consider additional funding sources
• A tax on every alcoholic beverage sold or a 1% real estate transfer tax could
generate funding for workforce housing. Relying upon the Land Authority funds
won't be enough.
Development Plan and Funding for Workforce Housing
• We need to figure out how to put: the land authority/ Housing Authority and bed
tax money together and form development plan for affordable housing.
ROGO AH Allocations
• Each year in Cite of Key West there are 90 affordable housing ROGO
allocations with the City able to borrow up to 10 years ahead to create more
affordable housing.
• Focus all tier -3 properties on workforce housing if it doesn't raise a property
rights issue.
Adopt lease form
• Cities should consider adopting a lease form with the public sector owning the
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 20I5 25
underlying land.
Support non - profits and their work on affordable and workforce housing
• Provide funding for nonprofit affordable housing entities.
3. State Government - Ideas and Perspectives
FFHC Set Aside for Monroe County
• Work to preserve the Monroe County set aside Florida Finance Housing
Corporation competitive applications for affordable housing tax credit
Sadowski Fund
• Sadowski Fund affordable housing funding has not been available for affordable
housing since 2006. Work to bring that funding back.
Tourist Development Tax and Workforce Housing
• Tourist Development Tax should support the building of workforce housing.
Funds go to the Monroe County Land Authority ($4 million) and Key West ($S
million).
• Consider changing the tourism bed tax statute to allow for supporting the
construction of workforce housing.
Combination of Issues
• In the Keys need to consider four factors: hurricane evacuation; environmental
protection of land and species; affordable housing; and water supply.
• During the economic downturn there was less interest in building AH.
Rising Rents
• Rising rents represent a big challenge for workforce housing and strategies to
address this should be considered.
NIMBY issues and Workforce Housing
• Monroe County needs to address the NIMBY issue that is a barrier to workforce
housing.
Protect Navy Noise and Crash Zone but look for workforce housing
opportunities
' Work with the Navy to protect noise and crash zones while looking for
opportunities to build workforce housing.
Support Deed Restrictions
• Support the use of 99 year leases for $1- Affordable forever.
• Assess current state of enforcement of deed restricted land and work to extend
leases to 99 years.
Identify and Aggregate Workforce Housing Parcels
• More could be done to identify parcels of land and aggregate them and analyze
opportunities for workforce housing on surplus lands.
• There may be opportunities for duplexes and quadaplexes on scarified small lots
for rental units.
Height Restrictions
• Consider relaxing height restrictions especially in the center of the islands with
existing tall buildings. This would provide additional workforce housing
FEMA Flood Maps
Monroe Count A Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 26
• Address the impacts of the new FEMA flood maps on Monroe County and
workforce housing.
Homeless
• Homeless are an important issue to address in a tourist economy. How many of
the homeless are there because of lack of affordable housing in the Keys?
ROGO System
• ROGO system has evolved and the modeling is scientifically and statistically
defensible in terms of hurricane evacuation time.
• There are affordable housing ROGOs that have not been used.
• The most recent annual travel study that shows how long takes to get over the 22
segments of the U.S. 1 highway, indicates a segment starting to fail in Islamorada.
Engage the Hotel and Hospitality Industry
• Hoteliers should be more engaged in the workforce housing discussion.
Convened a recent meeting for hoteliers in Islamorada to discuss this issue and
only 3 came.
Enforcement of Housing Ordinances
• Need to address and enforce the ordinances regarding unlawful modifications of
homes and overcrowding of residences.
Mobile Homes and RV Parks and Workforce Housing
• Need to address the question of the role of mobile /RV parks in supplying
workforce housing and the impact of conversions of these parks on availability
of affordable housing.
4. Education Sector Ideas and Perspectives
Target the kind of housing needed
• lducation has the same levels of workforce housing needs as other sectors.
• Have to focus on the target population in terms of addressing gaps in workforce
housing, e.g. Teachers, support and administrative staff, service industry workers,
etc.
Partnerships for workforce housing
• Interested and exploring partnerships for workforce housing development on
school board owned property.
Recruitment and Retention
• Recruiting and retaining teachers and professors in the Keys is a very challenging
problem due to the relatively high cost of housing.
• Retention continues to be a problem and accessible and affordable workforce
housing is part of it. There is a huge organizational cost to retrain.
Student Enrollment Stable
• The current context in terms of student enrollment is stable but not increasing,
having decreased during the economic downturn.
Single vs. Family Teachers
• "We have lot of young employees with over 70 new teachers." Young single
teachers may rent space with roommate(s), but teachers with family is another
matter as there is very little family friendly workforce housing.
• Many teachers in Upper Keys commute to Miami Dade vs. secure housing in
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 27
Monroe County.
• In Key West and the lower keys, the property values are the highest and present
a challenge for young teachers and teachers with families.
Involve the Public School System at the Workforce Housing Table
• Since the Public School system one of the larger employers in the County in
terms of teachers, support and administrative staff, there should be place at a
workforce housing table for this perspective.
Increasing reliability of teacher housing needs data
• The School system is working an improving the reliability of their data and its
collection related to employee housing needs.
Public private partnerships
• Encourage and support public private partnerships as part of the workforce
housing solution.
5. Development Stakeholder Ideas and Perspectives
Development Constraints
• The critical areas of state concern and environmental issues constrain the
available land for workforce housing.
• The cost of labor and insurance is climbing so incentives for workforce housing
will be an important stimulus.
Authorize Land Authority to Build Workforce Housing
• Fund the Monroe County Housing Authority or other similar successful
organizations to build workforce housing.
Convert public land for workforce housing
• The school board and the city may have large tracts that can he converted for
workforce housing.
• Need to use infrastructure $$ making land improvements for property we should
own- RFPs for developers.
Tax credit housing and workforce
• Meridian West- 102 units for very low income. It has the lowest turnover of any
very low - income housing project in Florida with 3 bedroom apartment renting
for around $1100. The very low and low income are the best served in terms of
affordable housing of the workforce population. Workforce housing is where the
gaps are.
Livability and Affordability
• Tax credit developers- Designed for good purpose but because of bureaucratic
overhead, can only do large scale projects that may look out of place and
unattractive to the people living in and nearby the units /development.
• Livability ideas are secondary with landscaping and signage not given a high
priority. Need to consider "livability" not just tax credits and affordability when
building workforce housing.
• Scale is an issue here with smaller projects there is a greater chance of
empowering residents to maintain their homes. The larger projects have ongoing
maintenance and management costs
Address Spectrum of Workers and Housing Needs
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 28
• Have to clarify what workers want and need in terms of housing. What is the real
need? Employees from Eastern Europe- Hawks Cay- Vast majority of
employees- 6 months at a time. Is sharing an apartment for these workers a bad
idea?
• What portion of staff /employers made up of transient migrant workers? What
are their needs? How many are working in City of Key West and where can their
housing needs be best addressed? What role might dormitories play?
Incentives for smaller unit projects
• Consider providing incentives for more smaller unit projects that will be more
livable. The tax credit resource funding for this doesn't practically work below
20 -25 units because of costs.
• Provide incentives for small apartment complexes, not big units, e.g. develop 10-
20 units with multiple occupancy.
• They can be nicely done dorm style with shared kitchen consistent ,vith
character, built to code and also preserve green space.
Hotels re- openings and workforce housing impacts
• May not be new hotels coming on but those that were shut down are reopening.
We need to be careful about what that means in terms of housing demand. There
may not be growth in the population going forward.
Workforce Housing and Live Aboard Boats
• What are the City of Key West statistics on Mooring Fields. There may be more
than 120 boats in mooring fields providing affordable housing. How many boats
are there for a short or longer time? How many are providing workforce
housing? What is the quality?
Addressing Trailer and RV Parks as Workforce Housing
• What role do existing trailer and RV parks play in affordable workforce housing
in Monroe County?
• What has been the enforcement experience with the 30% rule in converting
trailer parks in the County?
Waive building permit fees
• Have local governments waive building permit fees for affordable and workforce
housing projects.
Political will
• is there the political will to implement workforce housing solutions?
• There has been at times, for example the last Workforce Housing Task force in
2007 had some of it recommendation implemented.
Encourage mixed use
• We should be encouraging mixed use in central areas throughout the Keys.
Consider greater use of an inclusionary affordable housing fee
• The County should set a fee for inclusionary housing such as the $40,000 per
inclusionary housing credit that Marathon is proposing. This fee would be paid
to the Monroe County Housing Authority in an affordable housing trust fund to
be distributed to those who actually build affordable housing. This would create
a subsidy paid from new market rate or transient (hotel) projects to be
distributed to those who actually build the affordable housing.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 29
• To assure the housing is built and completed, the subsidy would not be funded
until the certificates of occupancy for the affordable housing are issued.
• This type of commitment would incentivize those who are willing to build
affordable housing, and the funds would come from those building the projects
that require inciusionary housing without the market rate developer from having
to use some of his /her market rate allocations on affordable housing.
• All transient unit development and re- development should require inclusionary
affordable housing ordinance, or impact fee assessment.
Increase density and height
• With limited lands on which to build affordable housing, increase the density and
height (e.g. 40 feet vs. 35 feet) for affordable housing to mare this feasible.
• Increased density in appropriate zoning districts within commercial areas to
facilitate workforce housing.
• Increase height in appropriate areas.
• Build up! Build new! Much of the KWHA properties are old, ugly, small and
inefficiently sparse. Density needs to increase.
Increase the capacity of highways
• To increase ROGO allocation work together to secure funding to increase the
capacity of highways.
Review city and county owned lands for use as workforce housing
• Identify all city and county owned lands for workforce housing that do not
present environmental issues and utilize for workforce housing.
Develop a workforce housing 10 -year strategic plan..
• Look for early successes in the first 3 -5 years in adjusting regulations. Set a goal
of cutting the gap in workforce housing by 50 %.
• The approach to "renter vs. ownership" should be "both /and."
Address the 2015 FEMA changes
• We need to prepare in required elevations (AE 7 becomes 9) and 60% of houses
will be in jeopardy making them harder to resale or rebuild.
Surplus land
• The County and Cities should inventory surplus land and identify land that can
be used for workforce housing,
• Lift the cap on the number of credits, keep construction costs per unit low
($25,000)
• Consider additional sales subsidy to help deals that are short.
Identify and Aggregate Parcels of Public Land
• County and the Cities haven't done enough to identify parcels of land and
aggregate them. We need to do more surplus land analysis.
Additional density for workforce housing
• We have to be creative. We should consider giving additional density to
developers who are constructing a workforce community /development with a
couple market rate units.
Add commercial development and redevelopment
• Based on employees and square feet (use industry standards and sales tax codes)
for an impact fee assessment.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 30
ROGO Transfers
• Implement a ROGO transfer ordinance whereby a market rate unit may be
dislodged if an affordable unit replaces the dislodged market rate.
• Issue no market rate ROGO units for multi -unit development projects, instead,
issue "affordables" and require developers to take the affordable units and deed
restrict existing market rate properties and then dislodge the market rate for use
elsewhere as their market rates.
Buy Down Interest Rates for Workforce Housing Projects
• Use land authority money or impact fees to buy do «jn interest rates for
development costs for work force housing projects.
Cut Taxing Rates on Workforce Housing
• Legislation to cut taxing rates on affordable and workforce housing.
Commercial Properties for Workforce Housing
• Give commercial properties that are used for workforce housing rental the same
tax and insurance (flood) breaks as primary homestead properties.
6. Lodging, Hospitality and Tourist Development— Ideas and Perspectives
The Hospitality Economy
• Hospitality represents 80% of the economic activity in the Keys. Its workforce is
very transient and generally looking to rent not purchase.
Lodging Industry and Workforce Housing
• Lodging industry may be only industry in the Keys that is trying to address
workforce housing for new properties. For example the Westin in Key West has
75 units set aside housing 305 people from managers to cooks.
Marketing and the Keys
• Focusing on creating a year round destination with success in Key West.
Spreading the marketing effort out over the year to increase visits and occupancy
in the off season and slow season. Colorado recently decided it had marketed
sufficiently and moved to disband their statewide marketing effort. The next
season resulted in a big drop in tourism. Tourism remains the keys part of the
Key's economy.
Importance of continuing to market the Keys
• Colorado experience in cutting budget for statewide marketing led to big drop in
the tourism economy.
Environmental Land Acquisition vs. Affordable Housing
• With the years in which funding was put towards environmentally land
acquisition, relatively little was invested affordable housing. What is a smart split
between the 2 purposes?
Transportation and the Keys.
• The transit service from Miami -Dade to Marathon and north in the Upper Keys
is currently funded by the Dade County local transit `/z penny, state and federal
dollars but no Monroe County support for the transit service.
• As job opportunities grow in Miami Dade, what impact will this have on the
supply of lodging industry and related tourist industry employees in the Upper
Keys? "Getting on bus at Walmart in Florida City to go south for work, the
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 31
question for workers is How available is work, where and how much does it
pay „
• Homestead and Florida City provide high densities of immigrant populations
which housing in Monroe County does not offer.
• Hotels in the Upper Keys are interested in working with Monroe and Dade
Counties in finding a solution to sustaining and improving the transit service that
provides lodging and hospitality works from Marathon and north. Some hotels
are supplementing the bus routes with their own busses.
• We need better transit in the lower Keys to support the workforce transportation
needs.
• Better public transportation in the lower keys. Reliability and cost of public
transportation options to deal with fact that more affordable housing is further
away from jobs.
• Need reliable transit from workforce housing to work especially with parking
issues in Key West. Alternatives such as biking and scooters are not practical
given weather. Consider using smaller and more transit vehicles in the Key West
area.
Employee turnover
• Person dependent industries cannot outsource jobs. Need to find ways to reduce
employee turnover which often relates to housing /rental costs.
Vacation rentals and Preserving Affordable Units
• This is a large problem throughout the Keys impacting the supply of workforce
housing. However it may be that many are above the workforce housing price
range.
• More important than building new workforce housing is how can we maintain
what is affordable for the median income workers. During the downturn
property values went down while rentals went up. Workforce housing is
primarily the rental housing market. Consider whether there might be
restrictions or new regulations creating some disincentives for converting units
to vacation rentals.
Online Vacation Rentals Marketplace
• Address the online market place for vacation rentals that connects users N
property- to rent with users looking to rent the space(e.g. AirBnB) and its impact
on bed tax revenue
• Also, related to this is the new addition of Air B &B and lack of regulation and
enforcement. This raises safety issues as well as the "free ride" by not paying the
bed tax, It may be much easier to rent through this approach than to a workforce
tenant.
Help Workforce Renters
• Consider providing down payment /deposit assistance.
Hospitality Industry Data
• Hotels have been reluctant to share data on workforce housing as some is tied to
employment contracts and privacy concerns.
Disseminating Workforce Housing Information
' We need more effective affordable housing information that is available to
workers.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 32
Height restrictions
• Can build more rental units on both 2 " and 3r`' floors with first floor commercial
in the lower Keys if the height restrictions are eased. For example consider strip
malls with the upper level dedicated to housing.
Public Property
• County and Cities may be the biggest land owners and should identify public
property with buildings that might be torn down to build housing.
Balance environmentally land acquisition with affordable housing
• investment. Historically, nothing or little has been allocated towards AH effort.
What is a smart split between the 2 purposes.
NIMBYism ( "Not in my back yard ")
' Lodging industry did general marketing efforts focusing on nurses and police and
workforce housing which helped. However, there continues to be a lack of
creating new workforce housing.
• Give Land Authority the ability to devote some of the bed tax funding to
purchase workforce housing.
Retention and the High Cost of Housing
• Tourist Development Council data shows that 94% of those leaving the County
are Ieaving because of high cost of living and housing.
Rents going up
• While land values dropped down during the recession, rentals went up as many
owners faced with increases in wind storm and flood insurance and property
taxes passed these on to tourism workers.
7. Business Sector including Real Estate
Island economy and community
• Housing has always presented a dilemma and changes in an island community
and economy. 100 years ago the cigar manufacturers had to address this.
• We have a dynamically changing environment with a finite piece of real estate
and nothing else to fall back on. Over the past 15 years, credit should be given
for successfully putting together affordable housing units in the face of
regulatory and NIMBY hurdles, but we are still far short of bridging the gap and
meeting the demand.
• "Checks and land" can solve the workforce housing problem.
Clarify our workforce targets for housing
• It is not clear what kind of workforce and housing are we seeking to provide?
Hotel, motel, restaurant or managers- each with a different set of problems.
• We don't know anymore what the community needs. Do we need single
residential occupancy for 500 guest workers in Key West? Probably not.
• We may not have an analytical feel for what we need in terms of workforce
housing throughout the Keys.
Impact on community of transient workforce
• What are we doing to the cultural makeup of the community with a transient
workforce? Children grow up and move to less expensive places instead of
making Monroe County their home.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 33
• Biggest concern is the character and flavor of Monroe county may be going away
and losing our foundation. The next generation shrinking.
Wind and flood insurance
• Rising insurance costs are compounding the housing problem- driving rents up
beyond affordability.
Political will
• We will need the political will to make changes to bridge the gap of workforce
housing
• Previous Task Forces on affordable housing have been very difficult and
challenging to serve on in terms of pleasing the elected leaders and citizens.
• Do we have the political - vvill to continue grappling with this problem and
implementing solutions? Is the problem only a shortage of affordable units
suitable for workforce housing?
• We have opportunities but do we have the political will to get this done? There's
too much, "I've got mine," in the community. How many of our elected leaders
works or owns a business?
Land trusts as a tool
• The Bahama Land Trust debacle has made serious discussion of land trusts as
part of the tool kit very difficult.
Prioritize units over "money in lieu of'
• Is it even possible to prevent gentrification on island that is 2X3 square miles?
Don't look for $$ in lieu of as we need units.
Hold off major changes to workforce housing pending the Affordable
Housing Committee's work
• The County appears to be getting ready to change income limitations to target
working households at the middle level. Hold off implementing changes until we
have reinstituted and charged the Affordable Housing Committee.
Permit Bed Tax to support purchase /building of workforce housing
• Change the law to allow purchase and building of workforce housing. Put it
where people can get to work.
S. Non -Profit Sector Ideas and Perspectives
Living wages
• Affordable housing programs for low income earners range from 80 to 140 % of
AMT, yet real wages for career type workers are closer to 60% AMI.
• Employers in Monroe County are not expected to pay a living wage. The wealth
created in our tourist economy depends upon low wage, high turnover, and low
skill employees.
Limited housing supply and investment wealth
• The outside wealth that purchases a second home or invests in real estate in the
Keys drives up the asking and selling prices for all properties where the dynamic
of a limited supply of land and great wealth seeking investment churns on
constantly. This dynamic is shared with other resort locations. The compromises
workers snake then is to work several jobs and /or to live in substandard housing
or to leave.
Monroe Countv Workforce Hoasing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 34
• We need to get more citizens of Monroe County invested in the future of this
place.
ROGO and affordable housing
• The measured gap between the number of units needed and the available
ROGOs demonstrates the futilint of trying to build our way out of the crisis. The
negotiations with DEO provide affordable housing units for the next 20 }rears
within the frame work of evacuation limits. These new affordable units are
critical but will. not solve the need.
• The operative assumption for allowing more density for certain types of
affordable housing is that all of the types of ROGOs are not necessarily equal.
Consider assigning a ROGO value of less than one unit for affordable homes
less than 600 square feet or so. The Comprehensive Plan, the DEO, and
evacuation models can be examined for alternative methods to allow more
density for affordable units that are smaller.
• The second home owners who are not necessarily in residence during the
hurricane evacuation season is an example of units counted against evacuation
times where the actual impact may not exist. The number of homes that are
vacant in Monroe County due to second home ownership has been noted in
several studies
• The Area of State Critical Concern uses the dwelling unit as its basic unit of
control. The management of and regulation of all home types will become critical
to assessing evacuation time. Monroe County should audit all housing types and
create an inventory detailing the status of each ROGO. Benefits from an audit
would include identifying flood prone structures, uninhabitable units, illegal
units, etc.
• Change ROGO to square footage.
Affordable housing has not been protected
• When government has granted greater densities or used inclusionary zoning it
has not always registered, audited or tracked compliance to ensure the
permanency of these precious units. Deed restrictions were not monitored.
• The temptation to convert affordable units into market rate units, rental or
ownership, is too great and with little penalty or notice.
Affordable housing "lost units"
• The community has a strong common interest in protecting those affordable
units it has lost after subsidizing or underwriting their creation. If the will were
to exist, these "lost "units could be investigated and the current owner asked to
revert them to affordable status. Liens and other mechanisms exist to "take" on
the public's behalf what was not proper to convert in the first place.
Redevelopment and inclusionary zoning
• Inclusionary zoning as a government policy has been in place for new
development. It is time to explore requiring affordable housing units from
redevelopment projects.
Lower and Middle Keys different workforce housing issues
• The lower and middle keys have different issues and solutions from the upper
keys where day labor bused in from the mainland can assist in the workforce. But
the market dynamics are found in common through all of the keys.
Nfonroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 35
Funding inequity
• A strong argument can be made to correct the inequity of the donor /recipient
that exists, based on the $6 million a year that Monroe County gives to The
Sadowski Housing Trust Fund every year compared to the pittance of $300,000
in SHIP funds returned this year and in the past.
Transportation
• Lack of transportation infrastructure makes workforce housing more
problematic.
New workforce housing partnerships needed
• Many differing approaches in scope and scale will be required with various
Partnerships between government, private, for profit and nonprofit developers.
Affordable yet substandard housing
• Rental housing that costs less than $900 a month, regardless of size or condition,
is termed affordable despite being unsafe or substandard or very small.
Political will
• The political will to make real changes in policies, incentives, regulations and to
commit resources remains to be sustained.
Don't repeat studies, focus on action
• The comprehensive studies, recommendations and published works on the topic
do not need to be repeated. The metrics of this problem are well known and
documented. The dynamics and facts have changed little over the years: outside
wealth creates seasonal homes that are not available; the profit generated from
transient units puts pressure on dense mobile home and RV parks; tourist
industry wages are low, turnover is high, landlords can rent substandard units
due to high demand for any type of housing, etc.
Other related issues
• While workforce housing is the focus of the moment, there are important related
issues of food insecurity, education, child care for employees are critical to the
workforce housing discussion.
• While addressing workforce housing, we should address homelessness (and the
growing youth % of this population) and help with the path back to working for
families.
• Where will the employees of the new lodging establishments be housedp
• There has been a huge uptick in the demand at food pantries across the County
and not just among homeless people but with working families still in homes.
47% of families countywide with kids under 18 are eligible for reduced lunch. Of
this population, 46% are minorities. Lack of affordable workforce housing has
led to food insecurity. If we didn't have a housing problem we wouldn't have a
food security issue.
• Many elected leaders are not aware of the childcare challenges faced by those
working and living in the Keys. Those who haven't raised family here are not
aware of the lack of child care options and its impact on the work force.
• If we can't control housing costs for working families, all other costs such as
childcare, food prices, etc. are related and compounded.
Expand the Keys Economy.
• We need to think outside the box and expand our efforts to build a future Keys
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 36
economy beyond tourism.
• We need all parts of the demographic in Monroe County,
9. Military Sector Ideas and Perspectives
Recruitment and retention
• Workforce housing affects the recruitment and retention. The housing set aside
for the base workforce has a long wait list. Housing is the #1 issue for their
civilian workforce. There is not a week where the Commander is not involved in
a family housing issue.
Communication and coordination
• In terms of the Naval Air Station lines of communication and coordination have
been improved with the Commander now the point of contact for coordination,
Presence in the community
• In terms of presence in Monroe County, there are roughly 1600 military
(including Coast Guard), 1000 civilians and 400 contractors or about 3000
employees and about 5500 including families, spouses and dependents.
Evacuation procedures
• In terms of evacuation, the Commanding Officer implements the
recommendations of the County Emergency Manager and will close the base and
issue evacuation orders for military personnel. Civilian workers are urged to
evacuate and are provided travel orders and funds to evacuate. The 550 RV
units in the Naval Air Station campgrounds evacuated first,
Need for buffer areas and workforce housing
• In terms of searching for solutions to locating workforce housing in Key West,
the Naval Air Station strives to protect public health and welfare and its mission
b keeping buffer areas separate without housing in the high noise of unsafe
areas surrounding the base.
• The Naval Air Station does not get directly involved in growth issues such as
density and intensity unless it directly impacts the buffer areas. Only exception to
this was their support for the widening of the 18 -mile stretch of US 1,
• General concern with the impact of vacation rentals on the supply of workforce
rental housing for the over 5,500 Base employees and their families, spouses and
dependents.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessrnent Report, April 2015 37
IV. WORKFORCE HOUSING PROCESS- STAKEHOLDER
PERSPECTIVES
A. Information Needed to Inform Consensus Building on Workforce
Housing
Monroe County staff has gathered a draft detailed baseline data that included an inventory of
affordable and workforce housing projects completed over the past 2 decades in Monroe
County, along with the public incentives that were made to assist in the housing
development.
(See: htrp: / /consensus. fsu.cdu /V'orlkforce- Housin
Asscssment /pdfs2 /DR,Ah'T County a nd Incentives v9-
2.ndf —
The maps that provide the locations of the developments included in the Table throughout
Monroe County:
Monroe County
Affordable Housing Permits
Lower Keys
oa o 8,
I
❑xa Sauxe Monroe CmnqGrnxa Alanngemmi- Piannnp bopanmo�i
o Affortlable Housing Permos
L Mile Markers
w� ? o
-- s
C
Upper Keys
i�.
a�
Middle Keys
`� o
lu --
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 38
1.4.a
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 1)
s
c�
s
0
m
ca
0
m
a�
s
= a
m
a�
m
r
s
a�
E
s
a�
E
M
U
0
J
G9
N
O
CL
O
i
a
a�
s
r
a�
m
r
m
CL
E
U
U
O
m
LO
I-
9
0
m
U-
s
.
s
m
a
2
U-
r-
0
r
m
Q
CL
Q
s
m
E
ca
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 1649
1.4.a
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 4 0
s
ca
a�
s
0
m
ca
0
m
a�
s
= a
m
a�
m
r
s
at
E
s
at
E
M
U
0
J
G9
N
O
CL
O
i
a
a�
s
r
a�
m
r
m
CL
E
U
U
O
m
LO
I-
9
0
m
U-
s
.
s
m
a
2
U-
r-
0
r
m
Q
CL
Q
s
m
E
ca
r
r
Q
Packet Pg. 1650
Staff also provided information on the ROGO system and annual allocations. Based on the
affordable housing units that are in the Affordable and Workforce Housing Pro)ects Table,
the distribution of deed restricted affordable housing units is currently:
ROGO Subarea
Uni
is
Upper Keys
346
Lower Key
431
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
19
Total.
796
Now incorporated as Islamorada
5
Now incorporated as Marathon
4
Total including those now incorporated
805
The balances of Affordable Housing Allocation" available as of Quarter 3 Year 23 (Jan. 13,
2015 - April 13, 2015) are:
a. Big Pine /No Name Key Subarea affordable housing allocation breakdown into the
two income categories are as follows: 1) very low, low, & median income 8
allocations and 2) moderate income 8 allocalions and
b. Unincorporated Monroe County excluding the Big Pine /No Name Key Subarea
affordable housing allocation breakdown into the two income categories are as
follows: 1) very low income, low income and median income 114 allocations and 2)
moderate 112 allocations.
The additional affordable allocations by Subarea up through 2023 include 710 total including
20 to Big Pine Key /No Name Key Subarea and 690 available for count} allocation
except for Big Pine Key /No Name Key subarea
10 The ROGO subareas are defined in Section 138 -20 of the land development code as Follows:
Sec. 13$ -20. - General provisions. (c) The ROGO allocation system shall apply within the unincorporated area of the
count= outside of the county mainland, and such area, for purposes hereof, has been divided into subareas as follows:
(1) Upper Keys: the unincorporated area of the county north of Tavernier Creek and corporate limits of the Village
of lslamorada (approximately mile marker 90).
(2) Tower Keys: the unincorporated area of the county from the corporate limits of the Village of lslamorada
(approximately mile marker 72) south to the corporate limits of the City of Key West at Cow Key Bridge on U.S.
Highway i (approximately mile marker 4), rxcludiiw Bier fine 1 'MId No Name Kcv.
(3) Big Pine Iffier and No Name Key: the islands ref Bi Pine hey and No Name Imes' �,Vitllin unincorporated the
counts•.
1 Monroe Counts° Code Sec. 138 -24. Residential ROGO allocations......
(1) Yearly residential ROGO allocation ratio. Each subarea shall have its number of market rate residential ROGO
allocations available per ROGO year. Affordable ROGO allocations shall be available for countywide allocation except
for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The annual allocations for Big Pine Key and No Name Key shall be eight market
rate and nvo affordable dwelling units.
;Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 41
In the course of the assessment interviews and meetings, various studies and data sources
were identified on best practices from other jurisdictions and ideas developed or considered
but not implemented by previous affordable housing task forces. These background papers
can be found at: http�/f co nsensus.f , ,u.cdu /NX'of force- Housing - Assessment/
B. Workforce Housing Stakeholder Perspectives on the Process Going Forward
Among the range of stakeholders interviewed, all expressed the need for a focused and
comprehensive county -wide workforce housing dialogue that involved those with a stake in
the outcome. Many believed that such a committee should develop a package of consensus
recommendations, informed by data and the range of stakeholder and public perspectives,
that can provide for both short and longer term actions for the Board of County
Commission's consideration. While some of those interviewed remained skeptical that there
will be sufficient "political will" to implement the Committee's recommendations as has
been the case in the past, many believed that this was an urgent and timely issue for the
County to address in light of hotel redevelopment and the economic upturn.
As one stakeholder put it, "the re- establishing of the Affordable Housing Committee is a
good step. Funding staff to work with it will be a measure of the commitment to effect real
solutions. The mix of expertise, perspective and operating experience that the committee can
bring to bear has great potential value. However, the community support and political will
must be nurtured for difficult decisions on the demonstrated effective approaches of density,
height and permanent protection and the mix of rentals and ownership."
In the Fall of 2014, following the initiation of this Assessment, the Commission re-
appointed members to the existing Affordable Housing Advisory Committee and with the
thought of convening and charging them with addressing \vorkforce housing issues and
providing the County Commission with its recommendations. The reconvened committee
would review this assessment report and other data as it addressed its charge.
A workforce housing committee, ad hoc or otherwise, appointed and charged by the County
Commission to address workforce housing issues in the Florida Keys was explored in the
assessment interviews. A significant number of those interviewed applauded the County
Commission's action in re- purposing the existing Affordable Housing Advisory Committee
to focus, at least in the short term, on workforce housing. It was suggested that this
approach could provide representation from each District in the County, offer workforce
housing perspectives from the public, private and nonprofit sectors, and minimize confusion
and any duplication of effort that an ad hoc workforce housing committee might create. It
was also pointed out that this charge would be consistent with the Committee's current
mission to address affordable housing opportunities in Monroe County for both "residents
and workforce." (ev, added)
A workforce housing committee, ad hoc or otherwise, appointed and charged by the County
Commission to address workforce housing issues in the Florida Keys was explored in the
assessment interviews. A significant number of those interviewed suggested the County
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakc;holdet Assessment Report, April 2015 42
Commission should consider utilizing and re- purposing the existing Affordable Housing
Advisory Committee to focus at least in the short term on workforce housing. It was
suggested that this would provide representation from each District in the County and
minimize confusion and any duplication of effort that an ad hoc workforce housing
committee might create in relation to the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. It was
also pointed out that this would be consistent with the Committee's current mission to
address affordable housing opportunities in Monroe County. The Ordinance also provides
that, "The advisory committee ma perform additional responsibilities related to affordable
housing at the request of the BOCC, including creating best management practices for the
development of affordable housing in the community." [2- 701(c)]
The Commission should review the current Committee appointments to ensure that a
balance of workforce housing stakeholder perspectives are included in its membership. If
the Commission charges the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee to develop consensus
recommendations on workforce housing actions for consideration by the Monroe County
BOCC, most stakeholders interviewed suggested there should be a sufficient range of
stakeholder perspectives represented and participating in the consensus building. This would
allow the Committee to develop informed workforce housing consensus findings and
recommendations that stakeholders might support and the County Commission could act
upon. 3
There is a great deal of public and stakeholder interest in the workforce housing issues the
Committee will take up. The membership requirements, as set forth in both Florida statute
and the Monroe County Resolution, do not reference representation of the municipalities in
the County, the military, the Monroe County School Board and perhaps other organizations
impacted by workforce housing policies and programs and with a stake in contributing to
solutions to improve the availability of workforce housing in the Florida Keys."
The format for the Committee meetings should encourage constructive public and
stakeholder input. The Commission might consider charging the Committee with
establishing an engagement strategy to involve a broader range of stakeholders in their
development of findings and recommendations. This might be accomplished through
opportunities for public input during their own meetings, as well as through Committee
12 This would be consistent with their responsibility for developing every three years an affordable housing incentive
recommendations report to the BOCC. The next triennial report -,will be due December 31 2017
13 The Current membership includes the following 11 members: Sylvia Murphy, Monroc County BOCC, Expires
11/2015, Tim Root, District 1, Expires 11/2016, Heather Roberts, District 1, Expires 11 /2016,]ames D. Cameron,
District 2, Expires 11/2018, Randy Wall, District 2, Expires 11/2018, Warren Leamard, District 3, Expires 11/2016, Ken
Naylor, District 3, Expires 11/2016, Hana Eskra, District 4, Expires 11/2018, Edwin Swift III, District 4, Expires
11/2018, William Wiatt, District 4, Expires 11 / 2016, lim Saunders, District 5, Expires 11/2016 and Stephanie Scuderi
District 5, Expires 11 /2016.
14 htrp: xv - nwnmeon } -fl,�-ru. /D ocumcnrCenrcr /Hc,me /V'ic« %695 The membership follows the requirements of
Florida Statute 420.9076 and Monroe County Resolution 062 -2009, and calls for representation from those involved in
affordable housing in: the residential home building industry from both a business and labor perspective, the mortgage
and banning industry, the real estate industry, an advocate for low income persons, a for profit and a not for profit
provider of affordable housing, a representative of employers in the County and a member of the local planning, and a
representative of essential services personnel.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 43
sponsored advisory workgroups, }oint workshops with municipal taskforces and city
commissions, workshops at key moments in the development of options and
recommendations, online surveys and other techniques. (See Appendix #7 for Advisog Groq
process recozlyzve"dalions).
It was observed by many that an advisory committee developing recommendations on
workforce housing will require dedicated staff, including legal and planning expertise, and
facilitation support for the Committee to do its work expeditiously. This is because of the
complexity of the charge, the intense public interest in the issue, the linkages with other
issues and programs and activities in the public, private and non- profit sectors, and the
desire for timely actions to address the current workforce housing challenges.
V. WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY - -NEXT
STEPS
The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners should review this Assessment
Report and charge the Affordable Housing Committee to focus its efforts in the coming year
on workforce housing.
With a charge from the County Commission, the Committee should establish its procedures
and approach and a schedule for meetings that would permit it to deliver back to the BOCC
its workforce housing recommendations by mid -2016. The Committee should consider-
• Developing a shared vision of success;
• jointly defining the workforce problems faced in the Florida Keys;
• Revie -vying the range of issues and options identified in previous studies;
• Reviewing the experience and lessons learned with successful workforce housing
pro)ects developed in the Keys to date;
• Reviewing this Stakeholder Assessment Report; and
• Developing a package of consensus findings and recommended solutions for
consideration by the Monroe County Board of County Commission.
This stakeholder assessment report confirms that there is wide agreement that Monroe
County is facing a significant and growing workforce housing crisis with shortages for both
affordable rental and ownership units. There is also agreement that no single strategy will
solve this crisis. Instead the challenge ahead for Monroe County and municipalities and the
range of stakeholders interested in workforce housing, is to craft a balanced package of
targeted options that have been refined through discussion and debate and that can serve as
a consensus framework for addressing and implementing solutions.
Monroe Counts' Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 44
APPENDIX #1
LIST OF MONROE COUN'T'Y WORKFORCE HOUSING INTERVIEWS AND MEETINGS
Name
OrLyanization
Position
1. Tonv Allen
Allen- Beyer. Funeral Home
Owner
2. Steven Auger
Florida Housing Finance Corporation
Executive Director
3. Debbie Swift Batty
Historic Tours of America
Director of Property
Development
4. jennifer Bennett
Tourist Develo ment Council
Research Director
5. Kristen Brenner
American Caribbean Real Estate
Realtor
6. Dustan Carpenter
Divine Dining by Dustan
Caterer
7. Heather Carruthers
Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners
Commissioner, District 3
8. J . Manuel Castillo, Sr.
Key West Housing Authority
Eveortzve Director
9. Harold Cates
City of Key West
Mayor
10. Don Craig
City of Key West
Plannin r Director
11, Porncbai Davidson
Naval Air Station, Key West
Commander, Executive Officer
12, Ron Demes
Naval Air Station, Key West
Special Asst. Advisor to the
Commanding Officer
13. Brenda Edmonds
Remax Realty, Marathon
Realtor
14. Hana Lskra
Gorman Development Inc.
Florida Market President
15. Debra Farrell,
21 s Century Schwartz Realty
Realtor
16. George Garrett
City of Marathon
Planning Director
17. Roman Gastesi
Monroe County
Administrator
1 S. Karen Hamilton
South Florida Regional Planning Council
Regional Planner
19. Christine Hurley
Monroe County Growth Management
Division Director
20. Rebecca ietton
Florida Department of Economic
Opportunity
Planner
21. Derrick ohnson
Coco Plum Real Estate
Realtor
22. Danny Kolhage
Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners
Commissioner, District 1 (Mayor
Pro Tem)
23. Kurt Lewin
First State Bwik of the Florida Keys
Executive Vice President
24. Kara Lundgren
The Islamorada Resort
General Manager
25. Ysela Llort
Miami -Dade Transit
Director
26, Capt. Steve McAlearney
Naval Air Station, Key West
Commanding Officer
27. Ashley Monnier
Naval Air Station, Key West
Community Planning Liaison
Officer
28. Nancy Muller
Florida Housing Finance Corporation,
Tallahassee
Policy & Special Programs
Director
29. Jim Murley
South Florida Regional Planning Council
Executive Director
30. Sylvia Murphy
Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners
Commission, District Five
31. Mark Moss
Habitat for Humanity Key West
Executive Director
32. Vir inia Panico
Key West Chamber of Commerce
Executive Vice President
33. Mary Pecorino
Coast to Coast Real Estate Grou2
Realtor
34. Mark Porter
Monroe County Schools
Superintendent
35. Barbara Powell
Florida Department of Economic
Opportuni ty
Planner
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 45
36. Dick Ramsey
City of Marathon
Mayor
37. Holly Raschein
Florida House of Representatives, District
120
Representative
38. David Rice
Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners
Commissioner, District 4
39. Mark Rison
Citizen (email comment)
40. `Tim Root
Mingo & Company
CEO, Commercial construction
41. Mark Rousch
Monroe County Land Authority
Director
42. Mayte Santamaria
Growth Management, Monroe County,
Florida
Assistant Director of Planning
and Envitoomental Resources
43. Jim Saunders
Bay -view Land Development & Permitting
- Mana er
44. Stephanie Scuderi
Home BancShares- Centennial Bank
Senior VP, Director of Business
Development
45. Jeff Sharkey-
The Capitol Alliance Group, Tallahassee
CEO
46. Jeff Sharp, Ray Freis, &
Christy Crooks
Florida Keys Seahorse Park, Homeowner's
Association Big Pine Key
Homeowners Seahorse Park
47, Pritam Singh
The Singh Com any, Kc , West
Developer
48. Andrew Spann
Mt. Carmel Communications, St. Louis, Real
Estate Investment & Development
Developer
49. Terry Strickland
Yankee Freedom II
Manager
50. Ed Swift
Historic Tours of America
CEO
51. Lisa Tennyson
Monroe County
52. David Thompson
Key Largo
Developer
53. Sandy Tuttle
American Caribbean Real Estate, Marathon
and Lower Keys Assoc. of Realtors
Realtor
54. Jodi Weinhofer
The Lodging Association of the
Florida Keys & Key West
President
55, Donna Windle
Southernmost Realty, Key West
Realtor
Monroe County Workforce Housing Roundtable Participants, August 2014
56. Debbie Swift Batty
57. Richard Beal
58. Heather Carruthers
59. J. Manual Castillo Sr.
60. Rita Cotter
61. Raymond Fries
62. Johnathan Gueverra
63. Derrick)ohnson
64. Amber Ernst - Leonard
65. Mark Moss
66. Jack Niedbalski
67. Holly Raschein
68. David Rise
Historic Tours of America /Habitat for Humanity
Skeeter's Marine
Monroe BOCC (District 3 Commissioner)
Key West and Monroe Co. Housing
Congressman Garcia's Office
Florida Keys Seahorse Park Association
Florida Keys Community College
Marathon and Lower Keys Assoc. of Realtors
Florida Keys Community College
Habitat for Humanity, Lower Keys and Key West
Habitat for Humanity, Upper Keys
Florida House of Representatives
AOCC
69. Timothy W. Root Utility Board Keys Energy /Workforce Housing member
70. Mark Rosch Monroe Co. Land Authority
71. Jim Saunders Bayview Homes /Development
72. Bob Shillinger Monroe Co. Attorney's Office
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 46
73. Donna Stavton
74. Jeff Stuncard
75. Owen Trepanier.
76. Mary. Warmouth
77. Tim. Wonderbn
78, Charles Todd Young
Florida DOH, Monroe Co.
Village of Islamorada
Trepanier and Associates, Inc.
Individual Advocate /Wells Fargo Bank
Habitat for Humanity, Middle Keys
Habitat for Humanity, Middle Keys
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 47
APP ENDIX 42
MONROE COUNTY W ORKFORCE HOUSING A SSESSMENT BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS
htwi [ co nsensus, Fsti xdu / \t'orl,Eot HOLIsini�- Ass essm n�
AFFORDABLE HOUSING STUDIES - FLORIDA
Sadov - ski Housing Coalition Press Release, 2015
Report from the Florida Housing Coalition, 2015
Out of Reach 2014: Florida
ALICE Report: Study of Financial Hardship 2014 klnited Way of Florida
AFFORDABLE & WORKFORCE HOUSING MONROE COUNTY
\ionroc Count` Affordable Housing Developments and Incentives DRAFT 3/25/2015
FCRC Consensus Center: ; \ssessing A \N'orkforcc l Iousing Initiati�re, 2014
ALICE Report: Study of Financial Hardship 2014 Monroe County F.xcerpt
Monroe County 2014 Income Limits and Rent Limits Florida Housing Finance Corporation
Key West Data Updates, 2012
Affordable [ Iousing Advisory Committee, 2012
LNIonroe County Housing Needs Assessment, 2008
Islamorada _\`(Workforce I Iousing; Support Stud] ,, 2007
Affordable Housing Presentation, 2007
Affordable Housing Background, 2006
Affordable Housing Needs Assessment 2006
Report on Retaining Tourism Workers II, 2006
Affordable Housing White Paper, Don Craig, City of Key West, 2014
Monroe County and Acquisition and lanagement blaster Plan, 2006
Summary of \Vorkforce Housing Task Force Recornmenciations I, 2006
Summary of Workforce Housing Task Force Recommendations 11, 2006
Study of the Monroe Counte Tourism \VWorkforce: Report on Retaining Tourism Workers, 2005
Florida Keys Strategy Paper, 2001
Operation Seamless, 2000 DCA
GENERAL INFORMATION- MONROE COUNTY
Monroe County Profile, 2012
,Nlonroe County Population Projections 2010 -2030, 2011
Housing and Population Chart, 2010
MONROE COUNTY AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN
Florida Kees Areas of Critical Concern, 2013
Florida Kees Areas of Critical Concern, 2012
AFFORDABLE HOUSING- BEST PRACTICES AND TOOLS
Affordable Housing Funding Sources, 2014 FFIC
\Vorkforce Housing Tools, 2009 Workforce I lousing
Best Practices
AFFORDABLE HOUSING LOCAL MEDIA COVERAGE
V'ideo link: Key West Housing Crisis Part I -Video
Video link: Key West Housing Crisis Part II Video
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 48
APPENDIX #3
MONROE COUNTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE O RDINANCE
SECTION 2- 700 -703
See. 2 -700. - Establishment of affordable housing advisory committee.
(a) The affordable housing advisory committee shall be established and operational by June 30, 2008.
It shall comply with all requirements in F.S. � 420.9076 (2007) or as subsequently amended.
(b) The committee shall consist of 11 members who shall be appointed by the BOCC by resolution.
(c) The committee must include:
(1) One citizen who is actively engaged in the residential homebuilding industry in connection with
affordable housing.
(2) One citizen who is actively engaged in the banking or mortgage banking industry in connection
with affordable housing.
(3) One citizen who is a representative of those areas of labor actively engaged in home building in
connection with affordable housing.
(4) One citizen who is actively engaged as an advocate for low- income persons in connection with
affordable housing.
(5) One citizen who is actively engaged as a for - profit provider of affordable housing.
(6) One citizen who is actively engaged as a not - for - profit provider of affordable housing.
(7) One citizen who is actively engaged as a real estate professional in connection with affordable
housing.
(8) One citizen who actively serves on the local planning agency pursuant to F.S. � 163.3174.
(9)0 ne citizen who resides within the jurisdiction of the local governing body making the
appointments.
(10) One citizen who represents employers within the jurisdiction.
(11) One citizen who represents essential services personnel, as defined in the local housing
assistance plan.
(d) All meetings of the advisory committee are public meetings, and all committee records are public
records.
(e) Staff, administrative, and facility support to the advisory committee shall be provided by the
BOCC. The advisory committee shall he cooperatively staffed by the local government department or
division having authority to administer local planning or housing programs to ensure an integrated
approach to the work of the advisory committee. (Ord. No. 014 -2008, 5 1)
Sec. 2 -701. - Duties of the affordable housing advisory committee.
(a) The affordable housing advisory committee shall review established policies and procedures,
ordinances, land development regulations, and the adopted local government comprehensive plan of
the appointing local government and shall recommend specific actions or initiatives to encourage or
facilitate affordable housing while protecting the ability of the property to appreciate in value. The
recommendations may include the modification or repeal of exiting policies, procedures, ordinances,
regulations, or plan provisions; the creation of exceptions applicable to affordable housing or the
adoption of new policies, procedures, regulations, ordinances, or plan provisions, including
recommendations to amend the local government comprehensive plan and corresponding
regulations, ordinances and other policies.
(b) By December 31, 2008, the affordable housing advisory committee is required to submit its
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 49
incentive recommendations report to the BOCC. After this initial submission, the reports are
required to be submitted triennially= on December 31, of the year preceding the submission of the
local housing assistance plan. At a minimum, the advisor) committee shall submit a report to the
local governing body that includes recommendations on, and evaluates the implementation of,
affordable housing incentives in the following areas: (1) The processing of approvals of development
orders or permits as defined in F.S. § 163.3164(7) and (8), for affordable housing projects is expedited
to a greater degree than other projects; (2) The modification of impact fee requirements, including
reduction or waiver of fees and alternative methods of fee payment for affordable housing; (3) The
allowance of flexibility in densities for affordable housing; (4) The reservation of infrastructure
capacity for housing for very low income, low income and moderate income persons; (5) The
allowance of affordable accessory residential units in residential zoning districts; (6) The reduction of
parking and setback requirements for affordable housing; (7) The allowance of flexible lot
configurations, including zero -lot -line configurations for affordable housing; (8) The modification of
street requirements for affordable housing; (9) The establishment of a process by which a local
government considers, before adoptions, policies, procedures, ordinances, regulations, or plan
provisions that increase the cost of housing; (10) The preparation of a printed inventory of locally
owned public lands suitable for affordable housing; (11) The support of development near
transportation hubs and major employment centers and mixed -use developments; (12) Other
affordable housing incentives as recommended.
(c) The advisory committee may perform additional responsibilities related to affordable housing at
the request of the BOCC, including creating best management practices for the development of
affordable housing in the community. (Ord. No. 014 -2008, � 1)
Sec. 2 -702. - Public hearing. The approval of the advisory committee of its local housing incentive
strategies recommendations and its review of local government implementation of previously
recommended strategies must be made by affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the
advisory committee taken at a public hearing. Notice of time, dates, and place of public hearing of the
committee to adopt final local housing incentive strategies recommendations must be published in a
newspaper of general paid circulation, must contain a short summary of the incentives strategies
recommendations to be considered by the committee, and must state the public place where a copy
of the tentative recommendations can by obtained by interested persons. (Ord. No. 014 -2008, � 1)
Sec. 2 -703. - Commission action required.
(a) Within 90 days after the date of receipt of the local housing incentive strategies recommendations
from the advisory committee, but no later than March 31, 2009, the BOCC shall adopt an
amendment to its local housing assistance plan (LHAP) to incorporate the local housing incentive
strategies it will implement within its jurisdiction. The BOCC must consider all of the strategies
specified in subsection2 - 70 1 as recommended by the committee.
(b) However, the amendment at a minimum, must include:
(1) Assurance that permits for affordable housing are expedited to a greater degree than other
projects. ( "Permits" are defined by statute to include development orders, building permit, zoning
permit, subdivision approval, rezoning, certification, special exception, variance, or any other official
action of local government having the effect of permitting the development of land);
(2) An ongoing process for review of local policies, ordinances, regulations, and plan provisions that
increase the cost of housing prior to their adoption; and
(3) A schedule for implementing the incentive strategies... b) By May 2, 2009, the BOCC shall notify
the Florida Housing Finance Corporation by certified mail of its adoption of the amended LHAP and
include a copy of the approved amended plan. (Ord. No. 014 -2008, 5 1)
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 50
APPENDIX #4
MONROE COUNTY WORKFORCE HOUSING ROUNDTABLE SUMMARY OF COMMENTS,
AUGUST 2014
WORKFORCE HOUSING ROUNDTABLE
August 25, 2014 Marathon, Florida
Representative Holly Raschein, Florida House of Representatives District 120
ROUNDTABLE COMMENT FORM SUMMARY
Par -ticipants in the Workforce Hoashi Rortndtable as ere invited to provide conagaesats for consideration in the
[Ylorkforce Hortsing AssessTvent being conducted by the FCRC Consensits Center at FSU. Belau is a list of the
i e.00ndents and the coTnpiled responses for the ColvIvent form questions:
1. Debbie Swift Batty Organization.: Historic Tours of America /Habitat for Humanity
2. Richard Beal Organization: Skeeter's Marine
3. Heather Carruthers Organization: Monroe BOCC (District 3 Commissioner)
4. J. Manuel Castillo St., Organization: Key West and Monroe Co. Housing
S. Rita Cotter Organization: Congressman Garcia's Office
6. Raymond Fries Organization: Florida Keys Seahorse Park Association
7. Derrick Johnson Organization(s): Marathon and Lower Keys Association of Realtors,
American Legion, Overseas Village Homeowners Association.
8. Johnathan Gueverra, Organization: Florida Keys Community College
9. Amber Ernst - Leonard Organization: Florida Keys Community College
10. Mark Moss Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Lower Keys and Key West
11. Jack Niedbalski Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Upper Keys
12. Holly Raschein Organization: Florida House of Representatives
13. David Rice Organization: Monroe County Commission
14. Mark Rosch, Organization- Monroe County Land Authority
15. Timothy W. Root Organization: Member of Utility Board Keys Energy, Appointed
member of Workforce Housing Committee by Commissioner Kohlage
16. Bob Schillinger Organization: Monroe Co. Attorney's Office
17. Donna Stayton Organization: Florida DOH, Monroe Co.
18. Jeff Stuncard Organization: Village of Islamorada
19. Jim Saunders Organization: Bayview Homes /Development
20. Owen Trepanier Organization: Trepanier and Associates, Inc.
21. Mark Warmouth Organization: Individual Advocate /Wells Fargo Bank
22. Tim Wonderlin Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Middle Keys
23. Chris Todd Young Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Middle Keys
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 51
L. WHAT ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES AFFECTING MONROE COUNTY'S
WORKFORCE HOUSING?
IFIhat is morking spell?
• The 100 -year deed restriction.
• Consideration of workforce housing.
• Collection of affordable housing (in -line) fees.
• When funded, Sadowski.
• Florida housing finance Corporation funding. Monroe County 40 funding. Key West housing
authority and Munroe County Housing Authority's management of government owned
apartments.
• Tax - credit housing has made gains recently, particularly in the Upper Keys. Building has
slowed over the past several years and presently is proceeding but only at a moderate rate.
• Land Authority — somewhat.
• PPP's (public private partnerships)
• Our park provides for visitors accommodation and tourist revenues.
• Habitat does well because they use partnerships and provide permanent housing.
• Habitat for humanity.
• Gorman developments in Upper Keys.
• New projects on Stock Island.
• Habitat for humanity -- he is one of the leading builders and renters of homes. They need
more assistance from government to provide land to build.
• Not enough information to know.
• Not much, if anything.
• Nothing.
• Nothing!
lrIhat's not?
• Confusion on definitions.
' Financing, high costs
• Cost of insurance.
• Set up funds for new construction, first time home buyers.
• Sadowski fund -- replenished for Monroe County.
• Sadowski Act funding.
• Lack of incentives for building affordable housing,
• More work, fewer people to do it,
• Workforce /affordable housing programs do not cover the full range of individuals struggling
to afford to live and work in the Keys.
• Insufficient collaboration and comprehensive county wide planning.
• I don't see a strategic plan all encompassing of all entities. This confusing topic must he
simplified, and can be.
• We need to figure out how to put the land authority/ Housing Authority and bed tax money
together and form development plan for affordable housing.
• Workforce housing is not affordable for working people.
]Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 52
• Availability of housing to reduce out of pocket rental cost to less than 20% salary. Personally
I am being priced out of housing as I do not qualify for affordable housing, My rent went up
$350 in the past three years with 10 pay raises to offset.
• Tourism /service jobs with low salaries. Wages insufficient for high cost of living,
• Not enough housing.
• Lack of availability.
• Buildable land for affordable housing.
• More second -home owners eating up properties.
• Limitations with non -tier 3 land
• Regulations, density, height.
• Length of permitting time,
• State housing allocations, land development,
• Legislation to cut taxing rates on affordable housing.
• Connection with job creators and requirements for housing.
• Many affordable units historically approved had short -term (20 years) deed restrictions that
are now expiring.
• Prior developers have not developed workforce housing as required.
• Housing for new businesses which require numerous employees. Identifying property to
locate workforce housing and providing incentives to builders. Always being, as we are now,
lagging behind the need.
• Landlords are having to raise their rent as they incur more costs for their properties through
tax increases, sewer, etc.
• Needs to he split between rental and home ownership. Not a one - size - fits -all solution.
• Availability of rentals.
• HGTV.
• Affordable housing advisory committee,
2. WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE THE FUTURE HOLD FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING
IN MONROE COUNTY?
lllhat are the future chal/ezlges that need to be addressed?
• Affordable housing allocations.
• Limited land /permitting.
• Difficulty to get permits.
• Finding a formula that functions as a continuum. One size fits all will not work.
• Lack of land on which to build housing.
• Land acquisition. There are less vacant buildable lots available each year. The market rate
applications /construction is increasing rapidly.
• Height ordinances
• Higher cost for rental properties, wind and flood insurance, plus higher taxes.
• Funding to offset housing costs.
• County requirements to match funding sources (HUD).
• Lack of funds to subsidize or offer incentives.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 53
• Changing state legislation to Land Authority and Housing Authority money to be used for
workforce housing. Using our bed tax money for workforce housing.
• Much of our current affordable housing is aging and not up to par for hurricanes which could
lead to a future loss of workforce housing.
• Ways to bring in new workforce housing for those at the top of the wage spectrum.
• Environmental regulations often "trump" the ability to build.
• Rising sea levels.
• Insurance rates,
• Tax rates,
• The same as the past 15 years.
• Focus! We need heads doom, rolled up sleeves, and accountability! Distinct set aside time and
deliverables.
lllhat are the fixture opportirid es that should be leveraged?
• Funding is increasing.
• Land Authority money.
• Counties (municipalities) inclusionary housing requirements should be funded partly by
business development with funding for employee /affordable housing.
• Sadowski fund -- replenished for Monroe County. Set up funds for new construction, first time
home buyers.
• Local, state and federal funds.
• State leverage for units to become allocated for affordable housing /workforce housing.
• Huge opportunities if we effectively link workforce housing to development and
redevelopment projects.
• Housing units must be incorporated in new developments being constructed.
• Require developers to build housing for the workforce.
• As energy efficient technology becomes better and better it should be used to make new
housing more affordable in the long term, especially since electricity is not cheap.
• Smoke free housing as an amenity for the health and safety of residence as a cost- saving
benefit for refurbishing units.
• Explore increasing height limit of structures and increase densities in certain zonings. Use
state and federal land for large affordable projects.
• Buildable land for affordable housing.
• Density requirements.
• Build up! Build new! Much of the KWHA properties are old, ugly, small and inefficiently
sparse. Density needs to increase.
• The greatest opportuninT is the current threat to our senTice economy. This threat has to be
leveraged to bring this issue to the forefront.
• Need to greatly increase the affordable workforce rentals.
• Housing requirements for commercial development.
• Rising flood and windstorm insurance rates.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 54
3. HOW SHOULD THE COUNTY BEST ADDRESS THESE OPPORTUNITIES AND
CHALLENGES AS WELL AS THE NEEDS OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY
AND RESIDENTS IN THE FLORIDA KEYS?
llr/I)at strategies should Moniroe Colrnty consider iii addressing i))orkforce hoaising issaresgoing foi7vard?
• Putting together a task force/ committee.
• Task force with staff (and legal support). Suggestions:
• All transient unit development and re- development to be inclusionary housing ordinance,
or impact fee assessment.
• Add commercial development and redevelopment based on employees /square feet (use
industry standards and sales tax codes) for an impact fee assessment.
• Fund the Monroe County Housing Authority or other similar successful organizations to
build workforce housing.
• Implement a ROGO transfer ordinance whereby a market rate unit may be dislodged if
an affordable unit replaces the dislodged market rate.
• Issue no market rate ROGO units for multi -unit development projects, instead, issue
"affordables" and require developers to take the affordable units and deed restrict existing
market rate properties and then dislodge the market rate for use elsewhere as their market
rates.
• Use land authority money or impact fees to buy down interest rates for development
costs for work force housing projects.
• Increased density in appropriate zoning districts within commercial areas to facilitate
workforce housing.
• Increase height in appropriate areas.
• Special considerations for landlords to make rental units affordable, while monitoring them to
verify affordability.
• Again, unifying developers, county and Key West city government representatives and finding
funding streams for us to define land acquisitions, builders to build on this land, and the
Housing Authority to oversee these affordable units.
• Offer additional subsidies or incentives. Countywide effort to identify and acquire property to
build.
• Work with DEO to increase ROGO allocations.
• Leveraging all resources.
• Many need more space.
• Focus all tier -3 properties on workforce housing.
• Give commercial properties that are used for workforce rental the same tax and insurance
(flood) breaks as primary homestead properties.
• Focus land acquisition on workforce housing properties.
• Provide funding for nonprofit affordable housing entities.
• Develop a comprehensive plan that also deal with density= and height restrictions.
• Create a strategy. There is no I year, 5 year, 10 year plan. Set goals. Consider "Outside the
box" ideas.
• Keep our unique parks.
• Adding to the planning smoke free amenity to curb costs in renovation. it is a CDC best
practice for reducing secondhand smoke and it's related to chronic health issues.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 55
APPENDIX #5
EMAIL COMMENTS
From: 2\-like Rison Cdfcmike @iserv.net>
Subject: Re: Article in Key West Citizen regarding Affordable Housing Monroe County
Date: August 28, 2014 I1:28:02 AM EDT
To: Bob Jones rmiones(ci;FSL :.t
I was reading an article in the Key West Citizen regarding "Affordable Housing" and your name was mentioned soliciting
Citizen comments. I would like to submit a comment about the "Affordable Housing" issue in Monroe County. Please
suggest the best way to submit a comment.
I might suggest some background information that could form the basis for your continued study of this issue.
As follows: The only place there is an "Affordable Housing" issue in the Florida Keys (Monroe County) is Key
West). That pressure is caused by a 2 by 4 mile Island with 22,000 permanent residents that welcomes 2,000,1700 Visitors
per year. To service those 2,000,000 Visitors Key West has approximately 7000 lodging units.
In most arcas across the country prices flow percentage wise from the cost of residential housing (for many different
reasons) in the case of Key Nest because the Tourist Development Council has done such a spectacular job of
enticing visitors to visit Key West all pricing flows from the room rates of lodging. Consider this; a company was formed
to purchase 4 old and aging hotels, closed them down, spent 3 years re- constructing them and will soon add 700
additional rooms to the lodging supply! The first thing that appears necessary is a fee on all Lodging to build "Affordable
Housing" for all working people as almost everyone in Key West is impacted by these huge numbers to support the
Lodging Industry.
A solution put forward by (probably by Developers) was to provide cheap transportation to areas of Monroe County that
have cheap housing costs, Tike Florida City. So enter the Lower Keys Shuttle (Key West to Marathon, 52,00), The Upper
Keys Shuttle (Marathon to Florida City $0.50 with a transfer). So for a maximum 52.50 you can ride anywhere between
mizal and mm120, 120 miles the only problem is you could spend 2 -4 hours on an air conditioned bus each way every
day. All subsidized by the Federal Government with no cost borne by the reccpicntants of this great service. I have
personally spent about 54.50 to ride to Fort Lauderdale International Airport (the Senior price). That's the Lower Keys
Shuttle, The Upper Keys Shuttle, 938 Busway, The Metro Rail, The Tri Rail, free shuttle to Fort Lauderdale Int. Airport.
Also as printed in the news paper your e -mail address is listed incorrectly ( rmjoncs {altsu.c du . ) that last dot after edu will
cause an e -mail program to "choke ". This may be your first indication of how the "powers that be" try to impede your
work while still appearing to support the idea of Citizen input! If you need a copy I have included as an attachment a
copy of the Citizen containing your e -mail address as printed in the Citizen.
Regards
\iR
dfcmike Q-lserc.nei
L _ -.n
11- ionroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 56
APPENDIX #6
"AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHITE PAPER- CITY OF KEY WEST
DONALD CRAIG & NICOLE A1ALO
Affordable Housing White Paper- Donald Craig, AICP Director of Planning & Nicole Mato AICP,Planner,
September 2014 City of Key West:
I�ttp : / /legistarl.�ranicus.ec�m /Key \\est /mce[iu s %2U1 }/10/2$91 Cirt Co 14-1(1
0- i1l�e l_ *end aPull_Detail.pdt
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 57
APPENDIX #7
S AMPLE COMMITTEE PROTOCOLS
There was a request for a sample of protocols that the Board of County Commission and any
committee they charge with addressing workforce housing might consider as they develop the charge
and organize the Committee's efforts. These are based on protocols developed and used by a variety=
of local , regional and statewide committees that have been charged with seeping consensus on policy
options.
(:0NS1�_':,vSUS
Defining Consensus
Consensus is a deliberative process where a group seeks a shared understanding of a problem
considers and evaluates all options and strives to achieve a practical agreement that all can live with.
Consensus means that, to the extent possible, each member commits to work toward agreements that
meet their own and other members needs so that all can support the outcome.
Consensus is a process, an attitude and an outcome. Consensus processes have the potential of
producing better quality, more informed and better- supported outcomes.
As a process, consensus is a problem solving approach in which all members:
1. Jointly share, clarify and distinguish their concerns;
2. Educate each other on substantive issues;
3. Jointly develop alternatives to address concerns; and then;
4. Seek to adopt recommendations everyone can embrace or at least live with.
In a consensus process, members should be able to honestly say:
• I believe that other members understand my point of view;
• I believe I understand other members' points of view; and
• Whether or not I prefer this decision, I support it because it was arrived at openly and fairly
and because it is the best solution we can achieve at this time.
Consensus as an attitude means that each member commits to work toward agreements that meet
their own and other member needs and interests so that all can support the outcome.
Consensus as an outcome means that agreement on decisions is reached by all members or by a
significant majority of members after a process of active problem solving. In a consensus outcome,
the level of enthusiasm for the agreement may not be the same among all members on any issue, but
on balance all should be able to live with the overall package. Levels of consensus on a committee
outcome can include a mix of-
Participants who strongly support the solution;
• Participants who can "live with" the solution; and,
141onme Count}' Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 58
• Some participants who do not support the solution but agree not to vote against it.
�[.lcc�SSi u1_N1v1,T1 1- c4s
Successful Meetings Overview
A successful meeting is a collaboration between members, staff, chair, facilitator, consultants (if
relevant) and affected stakeholder interest groups. Consensus -based processes and decisions,
developed working with diverse stakeholder interests affected by the issue(s), takes time to educate
members' on the range of issues and possible solutions. Members have different levels of expertise
and knowledge on the issues and require different levels of preparation and education ( "getting up to
speed ") before they are prepared to evaluate options and make decisions. This is especially relevant to
consensus -based decisions that strive for unanimity, or at a minimum a 75% level of support. In
consensus -based processes one is not dealing with a simple majority decision requirement, instead the
full range of issues and options are evaluated with the goal of ensuring stakeholder interests are
addressed to the extent possible, and at a minimum are fairly considered. The reality is that consensus
decisions, once reached, are durable, efficacious, long - lasting, and will have achieved the support of
most if not all of the stakeholder interests affected by the issue(s).
A meeting will be successful to the extent that staff, chair, facilitator(s) and project consultants plan
meetings and meeting objectives, ensure members receive relevant materials, and design and prepare
agenda packets, worksheets, surveys, and summary reports sufficiently in advance of meetings.
A meeting will be successful to the extent that members' review materials, study the issues, consult
with constituent stakeholders between meetings, complete pre and between meeting assignments, and
prepare prior to the meetings. If there are documents and /or information members believe should be
evaluated they should let chair /staff /facilitator know. Similarly, if there are meeting objectives and /or
agenda items member's think should be added to the agenda, they should identify them during
"Agenda Review" and during the "Next Steps" phase of each meeting where next meeting agenda
items are requested.
In summary, meeting success is a group effort requiring collaboration, cooperation, planning,
commitment, time and resources. It is the responsibility of staff, chairs, facilitators, consultants,
members, stakeholder groups, and the public to ensure meetings are productive and successful. 1n
short, it is "our" responsibility.
CONSFNSU",- B1.111,1)ING ANi) D,C]SI ON- 1VIAKING FlMc:FvURFS,
The Monroe County Affordable Housing Committee (Committee) will seek consensus on guidance
and recommendations to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (130CC)
The Committee's consensus building and decision making process is participatory, on matters of
substance, the members will jointly strive for agreements which all of the members can accept,
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 59
support or at least agree not to oppose. In instances where, after vigorously exploring possible ways
to enhance the members' support for the Final decision on an issue or package of advisor
recommendations, and where 100% acceptance or support is not achievable, final recommendations
of the Committee will require at least a 75% favorable vote of all members present and voting. This
super majority decision rule underscores the Committee's view of the importance of seeking
consensus. In the event the Committee can not reach consensus (75% in favor) on a decision, a
minority report may be requested immediately following the vote, describing the rationales and
preferences of those dissenting, to be included in the meeting summar report.
The Committee will make advisory recommendations only when a quorum is present. A quorum
shall be constituted by at least 51% of the appointed members being present (simple majority).
The Committee will utilize Robert's Rules of Order, as modified by the Committee's adopted
consensus guidelines and procedures, to make and approve motions; however, the 75% supermajority
voting requirement will supercede the normal voting requirements used in Robert's Rules of Order
for decision making on substantive motions and amendments to motions. In addition, the Committee
will utilize their adopted meeting guidelines for conduct during meetings. The Committee will make
substantive advisory recommendations using their adopted facilitated consensus - building procedures,
and will use Robert's Rules of Order only for formal motions once a facilitated discussion is
completed.
The Committee's facilitation team, in general., should use parliamentar procedures set forth in
Robert's Rules of Order, as modified by Committee's adopted procedural guidelines.
Any voting member may make a motion when a quorum is present, and after a thorough discussion.
A second is required to discuss the motion. If a motion is seconded, the Facilitator will open the
floor for discussion. The Facilitator will recognize members wishing to speak on the motion. The
Facilitator will, if time permits, recognize other participants wishing to speak on the motion.
The Facilitator may elect or be requested by the member making the motion to take a "straw poll" on
the motion. Based on the result, the Facilitator may table the motion with the agreement of the
member moving it, pending further discussion. The member making the motion may accept friendly
amendments to the motion. After completing discussion, the Facilitator will call the discussion to a
close and restate the motion, with any friendly amendments, and call for a vote. If the motion
receives a 75% or more favorable vote of the members present and voting it will be approved.
1NI1 , a1IiliR "; I$OI.1-
✓ Prepare for meetings. Review documents and background material prior to meetings.
✓ Keep to the agenda and meeting procedural polices and guidelines.
✓ The Committee process is an opportunity to explore possibilities. Offering or exploring an idea
does not necessarily imply support for it.
✓ Listen to understand. Seek a shared understanding even if you don't agree.
✓ Be focused and concise --- balance participation & minimize repetition. Share the airtime.
✓ Look to the facilitator(s) to be recognized. Please raise your hand (or tent card) to speak.
✓ Speak one person at a time. Please don't interrupt each other.
✓ Focus on issues, not personalities. "Using insitlt instead of argztvnent is the sigya of a small mind "
✓ Avoid stereotyping or personal attacks. "Afud thrown isground lost."
Monroe County Workforce Housing 5takeholdcr Assessment Report, April 2015 60
✓ To the extent possible, offer options to address other's concerns, as well as your own.
✓ Participate fully in discussions, and complete meeting assignments as requested.
✓ Represent and communicate with member's constituent group(s).
✓ Refrain from using electronic devices during the meetings; Keep electronic devices turned off or
silent.
FACii.I'rA') oP, Roi.13 (F(.RC Consensus Canter (ir. FS U)
✓ Design and facilitate a participatory= Committee process.
✓ Ensure a fair process during which all perspectives are considered.
✓ Enhance the opportunity for consensus building encouraging constructive discussions among the
members.
✓ Assist the Committee to build consensus on advisory recommendations.
✓ Assist participants to stay focused and on task.
✓ Assure that participants follow ground rules.
✓ Prepare agenda packets and provide meeting summary reports.
MONROE COUNTY STAFr ROI,>✓
✓ Respect meeting process and guidelines.
Il7.j."m , " Rs (w Till; Purw -ic Rou,.
✓ Respect meeting process and guidelines.
✓ Provide input during provided public comment opportunities.
✓ Consult and provide input to their representative stakeholder members to enhance the efficacy of
the process.
GuIDELINE'S FOR BRAINSTORMING
✓ Speak when recognized by the Facilitator(s).
✓ Offer one idea per person without explanation.
✓ No comments, criticism, or discussion of other's ideas.
✓ Listen respectively to other's ideas and opinions.
✓ Seek understanding and not agreement at this point in the discussion.
1'I li; NAMEl STACKING PROC.F.SS
✓ Determines the speaking order.
✓ Participant raises hand to speak (or raise name tent). Facilitator(s) will call on participants in turn.
✓ Facilitator(s) may interrupt the stack (change the speaking order) in order to promote discussion
on a specific issue or, to balance participation and allow those who have not spoken on an issue
an opportunity to do so before others on the list who have already spoken on the issue.
GUIDE-LINEIS FOR RE PORTI, AND PKI-SEN "l .'1'I'i {]: s
✓ Facilitator introduces presenter.
✓ Hold all questions until report or presentation is complete, unless invited by the speaker.
✓ Facilitator stacks names.
✓ Facilitator calls on members to speak.
✓ Clarifying questions only. (For discussions, see guidelines below.)
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 61
Cst�Ii?LT.11�'I�" rOR DiSCUSSR , A�,,t) PROI'C:SAI.S
✓ Facilitator guides process,
✓ Meeting guidelines remain in effect.
✓ Facilitator stacks names.
✓ Proposal is presented (no comments or discussion).
✓ Clarifying questions are taken (no comments or discussion of the proposal).
✓ Discussion of proposal (focus on issues, refine proposal, and consensus building).
✓ Consensus /Acceptability ranking as needed.
✓ Facilitator tests for consensus with a motion to approve and a vote.
ACCI'YTABIIJTI RANEIN C'SCALE:
During the meetings, members will be asked to develop and rank options, and following
discussion and refinement, may be asked to do additional rankings of the options if requested by
members and staff. Please be prepared to offer specific refinements or changes to address your
reservations. The following scale will be utilized for the ranking exercises:
AccEP7rn>exz>rY
4= Acceptable
3= Acceptable,
2= Not Acceptable,
1= Not
RANKING
I agree
I agree n4tb minor
't ree unless major
I don gg
Acceptable
SC ALE
reservations
reservations addressed
l-'ltIORI'II ATION RANKING SCALE
5 Highest Level of Priority; Urgent
4 High Priority
3 Moderate Level of Priority
2 Low Level of Priority
1 Lowest Possible Priority; Committee Should not Pursue
Topic RANK 5 4 3 2 1 RAA A 'vERAGE
S CORE
AGE'NDA SUliM U]"i'AI. AIrD CONSIDFRATION ;1FROCEDCRES
All agenda items must be submitted by close of business ten (10) days prior to the next scheduled
Committee meeting.
The staff will review a proposed agenda item for a determination of whether the issue falls under the
charge of the Committee. Staff will notify the member proposing the agenda item of the
determination whether the issue will be placed on the Committee's next agenda.
Committee members will receive all proposed agenda items and supporting documentation at least
seven days prior to the next scheduled Committee meeting.
No new agenda items will be considered at the Committee meeting with the exception of those issues
raised by the staff that have been determined to require immediate Committee action, or by the
unanimous (100%) approval of a quorum of the Committee through the Chair.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 62
Agenda items that meet submittal criteria and arrive after the established deadline will be placed on
the next regularly scheduled Committee meeting agenda.
Based on number of agenda items the Facilitator, in consultation with the Chair, may allocate a
specific amount of time for each agenda item.
The Committee by a 75% favorable vote may discuss requested agenda items not meeting the
submittal criteria requirements but may not take any formal action on the issue until the next
scheduled Committee meeting.
Special meetings may be called by the staff in consultation with the Chair, based on urgency and
necessity for immediate action.
AGE'NI)�t f I E`N] SUB,\II CI ITERIA
Agenda item must be submitted 10 days prior to regularly scheduled Committee meetings.
Proposed agenda item must clearly state the action requested of the Committee. If applicable,
proponent should provide exact ordinance, rule or statutory references that the proposal addresses.
Proponent should provide all necessary supporting documentation required for Committee and staff
to determine the merits of the request. Proponent must indicate that they have not requested any
additional actions on the proposed agenda items such as an administrative hearing or declaratory
statement. Proponent must provide the following contact and agenda information:
CONTACT INFORMATION
Name:
Or anization /Re resentation:
Address:
Phone and Fax Numbers:
E -Mail Address:
Date Submitted:
AGENDA ITEM INFORMATION
Date of Committee Meeting:
Name of Presenter:
Representation of Presenter:
Agenda Item Title:
Amount of Time Requested:
Rationale for Agenda Item:
Sp ecific Action Requested:
Background Documentation:
't�.1�IE. ➢ °6 Ft2Crt,`5�= � Ni) 1't'1?- 1i�.0'ti�[i31_.1C��lilA
1. Facilitator introduces the agenda item /proposal.
2. Proponent states the action requested and provides rationale for proposal.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 63
3. Facilitator asks Committee members only for clarifying questions (a clarifying question
addresses a specific point that is not understood, and should not indicate support or
opposition to the proposal).
4. After questions, the facilitator opens the issue up for discussion. All Committee members and
Staff wishing to speak raise their name tents and be acknowledged by the Facilitator prior to
speaking. Committee approved meeting guidelines are in effect at all times.
FOR PROPOSALS (issues requiring Committee action): Following Committee member's
preliminary discussion, the facilitator asks if any members of the public wishes to address the
Committee on the current issue under Committee consideration. The facilitator serves as a moderator
for public input. The facilitator asks for those who wish to speak in favor of the proposal or topic
under discussion to offer brief comments, others who wish to speak in favor will be asked to offer
new points or simply state agreement with previous speakers. The same opportunity and
requirements will be offered for those �vho wish to speak in opposition to the proposal or topic
under discussion. The facilitator ensures that all views are expressed and similar views are not
repeated. Members may, through the facilitator or chair, ask clarifying questions to members of the
public offering comments. The facilitator or chair may limit public comment to three (3) minutes per
person. This process will be used for substantive Committee issues and not for procedural matters
before the Committee.
FOR DISCUSSION I SSUES (no formal action required): Following Committee member's
preliminary discussion, the facilitator asks if any members of the public wishes to address the
Committee on the current issue under Committee consideration. The facilitator serves as a moderator
for public input. Members of the public will be provided one opportunity to comment per discussion
agenda item, and may be limited to three (3) minutes. Members may, through the facilitator or chair,
ask clarifying questions to members of the public offering comments. This process is used for
Committee substantive issues and not for procedural matters before the Committee.
FOR PROPOSALS AND DISCUSSION ISSUES (Substantive Agenda Items After discussion and
public comment, a Committee member may make a motion for an action on the issue. If there is a
second to the motion, the facilitator will call for discussion. Once a motion is made and seconded the
discussion will be restricted to only Committee members unless the facilitator or chair requests
specific clarification from the staff or a member of the public. Members may request specific
clarification from a member of the public through the facilitator /chair. A member may wish to
second a motion for the purpose of Committee discussion and not necessarily as a show of support
for the motion. If the motion involves an option that the public has already commented on, then the
vote is taken, if the proposed action (motion) is materially different from what was discussed, an
additional opportunity should be provided for public comment, and then the Committee votes on the
motion.
Only motions to approve will be considered. There will be no motions to disapprove, If there is no
motion after discussion or a motion with no second, the requested action is not approved.
Monroe Count= Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 64
• Facilitator introduces each agenda item.
• Proponent /Presenter provides overview, rationale for proposal, and any requested action.
• Clarifying questions from members (i.e. something you don't understand). Names stacked (raise
name tents).
• Committee begins discussion only after all questions are answered.
• General discussion by Committee members.
• When appropriate: Facilitator asks if any members of the public wishes to address the Committee
on the current issue under Committee consideration. Facilitator asks for those who wish to speak
in favor of the proposal or topic under discussion to offer brief comments, others who wish to
speak in favor will be asked to offer new points or simply state agreement with previous speakers.
• The same opportunity and requirements will be offered For those who wish to speak in opposition
to the proposal or topic under discussion.
• Facilitator ensures that all views are expressed and similar views are not repeated.
• Facilitator may instruct members of the public to avoid repeating points, and encourage them to
summarize key points and to submit lengthy prepared statements into the record that will be
included in the meeting summary (instead of reading them).
• When appropriate: Members of the public will be provided one opportunity to comment and may
be limited to three (3) minutes.
• Members may, through the facilitator or chair, ask clarify =ing questions to members of the public
offering comments.
• After public comment, facilitator calls for members' discussion and stacks names of members
wishing to speak.
• Members explore the pros and cons of all options prior to making a formal motion.
• Any voting member may make a motion when a quorum is present which will require a second.
• If a motion is seconded, the facilitator opens the floor for discussion. The Facilitator will
recognize members wishing to speak on the motion.
• Committee votes on the motion.
• Once a motion is on the floor discussion is restricted to Committee members except as allowed by
the facilitator or chair for purposes of clarification.
• For Committee members offering a second, is it understood that they may be seconding for
purposes of discussion, and not necessarily due to agreement with the motion.
• Committee members may offer friendly amendments. If accepted by maker of the motion, the
friendly amendment becomes a part of the motion currently under discussion.
• In order to get a "read" on a motion, the Facilitator may elect or be requested by the member
making the motion to take a "straw poll" on the motion. Based on the result, the Facilitator may
suggest to the member moving that they withdraw or table the motion pending further discussion..
• Committee members may offer an amendment to the motion: second required, discussion, vote
on the amendment only.
• The motion on the table is now the motion as amended (if amendment was accepted by the
mover and approved by 75% or greater of the Committee). After completing discussion, the
Facilitator will call the discussion to a close and restate the motion, with any friendly amendments
or approved amendments, and the Facilitator will call fora vote. If the motion receives a 75% or
greater favorable vote of the Committee members it will be deemed approved.
N4onroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 65
'L.li3l..l( PA. 1 1 11 CIPATION' FItC)(;FDIIRES, POLICY
PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURES: Public comment opportunities provided during Committee
meetings are for comments only. The public is also encouraged to provide their comments in writing
using the Public Comment Forms to ensure accuracy. All written and or electronic comments will be
included as in the Facilitator's Summary Report. Public comment provided orally during meetings will
be summarized and included in the Facilitator's Summary Report.
TIME LIMITS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT POLICY: The minimum time allowed per person wishing to
comment is three (3) minutes and the maximum is five (5) minutes. The facilitator will check for the
number of people wishing to comment and the amount of time left in the meeting, and poll
Committee members for the amount of time they prefer to allow for each person -'vishing to
comment from three (3), four (4) or five (5) minutes.
PUBLIC OPPORTUNITY To BE HEARD POLICY: The Committee will provide a regularly scheduled
general public comment opportunity at each Committee meeting. In addition, the public will be
provided an opportunity to comment prior to the Committee voting on substantive policy matters
(actions that are not procedural or ministerial in content). If a decision is to be made over the course
of multiple meetings (i.e., discussed at one meeting and voted on at another meeting) the public will
be allowed an opportunity to speak on the issue during the regularly scheduled Public Comment
opportunity. If a decision is to be made at the same meeting where the issue is first discussed the
public will be provided an opportunity to speak after Committee discussion but before a vote is
taken.
If there are a large number of individuals wishing to speak from the same group, the Committee
Chair and facilitator may decide to require representatives of groups to speak on behalf of their
respective groups, rather than all members of a group speaking. The group shall elect one person to
speak on their behalf and notify the Committee of their selected representative prior to public
comment.
PROCEDURE FoR REQUESTING TO MAKE PRESENTATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE: Members of
the public wishing to make a presentation to the Committee should contact their constituent
stakeholder representative on the Committee. If the Committee member agrees that the presentation
is relevant and beneficial to the Committee they will discuss the presentation with staff, and staff will
review the presentation for relevance, accuracy of data, and balance of perspective and if deemed
beneficial to the Committee, they will present the request to the Committee for their consideration. If
the Committee is interested in having the presentation it will be scheduled for a subsequent meeting
with appropriate time set for the agenda per agenda submittal policy.
DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION TO COMMITTEE PROCEDURES: Members of the public wishing
to distribute information to the Committee should provide the information to the facilitator or staff
in electronic format for distribution to the Committee.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 66
C oNiml'1 "1.I_I'.NTj - . A,T. ii'1_'I NCJ POE ICY
Any members of the Committee who fails to attend two consecutive regularly scheduled meetings
will be contacted by staff to determine why the member was not able to attend and if the member
still wishes to serve on the Committee. If the member cannot demonstrate his or her absence was for
good cause, which includes but is not limited to personal or family illness or military service, or no
longer wishes to serve on the Committee, Staff `will request the member submit a written resignation
from the Committee to their appointing member of the County Commission. If the member refuses
to resign, the Committee will recommend to the Board that the member's appointment be terminated
and a new member be appointed as a replacement.
CONIMITTEE A.I)OPTED GuIDI G PRINCIPLYS
1. The Committee will adhere to their charge and purpose by providing advisory
recommendations to the County Commission
2. The Committee Will strive to achieve consensus on the evaluation and development of
substantive advisory recommendations submitted to the County Commission.
3. The Committee will operate under adopted policies and procedures that are clear and concise,
and consistently and equitably applied.
4. Committee members will serve as liaisons between the stakeholder groups they have been
appointed to represent on the Committee, and they should strive to both inform and seek
input on issues the Committee is addressing from those they represent.
MI-ETIM; Fizt_ IuL'NC1 POLIC1
The Committee shall agree on a workplan and schedule consistent with meeting its charge at its
organizational meeting. Additional meetings may be called by the Staff or Committee chair as
required.
ABSF.NTEF. CONIINUTITE fib' ENIBE'I C,ON1'N1k'NT PO1JCY
Any member of the Committee who wishes to have their comments /opinions read into the record at
a meeting they will not be able to attend, may send their written comments by e -mail to the
Facilitator and the Staff. The member should identify the agenda item(s) that the comment(s) pertains
to. The Facilitator will read the absentee member's comments into the record during tl discussion
portion of the specific agenda item the member is commenting on, and the member's comments will
be included in the facilitator's meeting summary report. The Committee member may only make one
comment per agenda item, and each comment will be limited to a maximum of five- hundred (500)
words.
CHAIR Ei.1'.CTION PC)LIC(
The Committee will elect a chair from within the existing membership, who will serve in that position
for a one -year terra. The Chair will work with the facilitator to moderate the Committee meetings.
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 201-5 67
APPENDIX #8
INFORMATION ON FCRC CONSENSUS CENTER, FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY
*1
CONSENSUS CENTER
"Facilitating Consensus Solutions, Supporting Collaborative Action. "
The Florida State University
Morgan Building, Suite 236
2035 East Paul Dirac Drive
Tallahassee, FL 32310
Phone: (850) 644 -6320
Fax: (850) 644 -4968
httt 1 j consensus.fsu ,edu
e:;ti SF. IIM�
'HE
- l FLORIDA STATE
�y UNIVERSITY
1851
T17e FCRC CoTZSenra Center segues as an iradependentpnbtic resorarce facilitating consensas solkions and
szspporting collaborative ractim.
The Consensus Center, based at Florida State University in Tallahassee and University of Central
Florida in Orlando, provides consensus building and collaborative planning services, education,
training and applied research. Through our work, we strive to build a broader understanding of the
value of collaborative approaches and create a cadre of leaders, professionals, managers,
stakeholders and students skilled in using collaborative consensus building processes to produce
and implement soiution.s.
The Center offers neutral technical assistance to a wide range of public and private organizations,
professionals, agency staff and private citizens engaged in collaboration on public and
organizational challenges throughout Florida and the country. We help to design and implement
efforts for strategic planning and public problem - solving. We have substantial experience assisting
with a range of stakeholder collaborations on topics such as building codes, land use, water
resources, environmental, energy, airspace.
Contact us if you'd like to explore utilizing a collaborative approach and the Center's services.
Robert M. Jones, Director FCRC Consensus Center rmjones(yfsu,edu
Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 68
EXHIBIT B
cu
tm
0
as
cu
0
4=
cu
tm
tm
as
E
E
ca
0
CL
0
CL
as
E
L)
L)
0
CN
M
CL
.2
E
bd
cu
CL
a
4)
E
.a
L)
cu
00089911 - 0
5/1912017
t)A HOUSING DATA CLEARINGHOUSE
Hwadte 4'rl.tem . '=
Ramon nl BLocul Piof P,'
!,-
aTManx�,�a „a„a.a
Housing Profile
I o¢ „rwa, e,rrad,,,
Monroe County, Florida
cxl .e�scr_
Papdasm,]019,In206.MPnrce C¢umt ra�ksk 36 at Flwda'r.6l wanrssia pogr6al�an.
` cocnsnxk .yFa
Househdds, 2015:33658
General Vni, G :rarorlcr�.s', --s
r!¢nnwmeMlPOalo,3 915. 58R `- .5b�evac,Fk+kishcneovmensln nre ls61,1fo,
- Population Prei�c : :ns
n etax
P o.m
N]oeq,M,nrw co�ett is n:>)caNew ha.ea wnia,Anuz.w5, raekia9 ua.r MPter4ae61 m�:na�
Regional & Local Profiles
Prolcctad Total Population, Monroe County, 2010-2040
%ace ]C10 ]019 2020 20]5 1050 2q]9 2040
aklin0 HPma Vetoes (Barad on County Property Appraisers lust V.I..)
W b, Fan , llw e_SSres a- !latex a, al MasxMaein9tc mrr:hheae'm FW:aainzgravms Onset}.
Mobile Havre, —j —..N16: 5119582.
conaommum. a. gc inetraWe, 20s6:fJ92129.
Median Grou Rent, Monroe County, 1010 -]D14 Ameriren Cammrinity 5nrve
+h
Lr MOnrce Count one me wmwnding metro area, me IfOp Fair Masker RaM in 2016, rePreunr2d renliw a Mpml maMm aPammenr. aeas99991ora motto eaoNren1.51100br a one-0eermm
Sta�3 br a N,aaedroom, Stb2d for a mmobeamom,arie S20ag fora rauranamom unrt
Sp�ru' Il.6.CePanne.nr MFbuseg and Hrhan Dweiopnem, 2916 Fvr Marker Rentt
Households by Monthly Rant Paid, Manror. County, 2010 -2014
C]w 5200 -f]ss 51o� -[t ^9 ssco -SSav 15o39v^ St.u0o31.as5 St,soO ar more Taral
II I s 1
.sw1 -_ I — 1 vFb sir.• .r. _ see ,, r.e '.. e _ _.. 1
Martutachred Mo.rsinv Paths and Condominiums
Th T — are xs I'senaatl nvnvWwme Muana aaN¢in M1bnme rwm 19091oRin ]012.
ere are 3as1mnree mnaummum tlavobpreuutsn MUnroewim sa,rvai..rn 2012otmaaa,1 %opo .vah,ass unr. xem ronvoaoa rrom,onlalraeonea
swr¢e: Fkdea Deaaronem ar6,dne:aane Pr¢Ngi¢nar Reenlan«r
Home Purchase Lae nn by Proparty Type, Manree County, 2005 -2014
Foreclowres and Serious Delinquencies
This table is not available outside ¢f Metropefitan Statistical Areas (MSAS)
Cast Borden, acnarat
C¢zsbuMenad M1waeM1aNSpeY nwry LSan 30X o(irwmo kr rent or moNa9a eosa.ln 2015, 1fA15 Monroe Cwnry h¢vreh¢itls (19 °.) Pay more lM1aa 30y, olittavm iw M1ausina. BI wiryeriwn.
rwnebkeaieado are mulr�beiwa-
d813 hwaohddr M1 ktNrJ¢ Cavny Q6 %1 W Y Hare than SOY, ¢i ry,romo for Mvvng.
Households by Cost Burden, Monroe Cou 1015
to 6a% cn
xn9
I-
t -_k..
Hauaehaltls by Homaownarl RCniar Status end Gael Burden, Monroe County, 2015
1, l
http: //fl hous i ngdata.shi m berg,ufl.edulalprofi les ?acti on= results &nid =4400
Home 5a1as Prices
7no av rag baq+n lw aargb brr;ty hprM >SSa1559 ingots -The median rakap,NCUatyvar wasd55ip0o- �aradba5arm ,AaeneciansMcapriceor521Yr7q-
.evrw'. Fbrida CeperbmM dRa':enu¢. Faka Wh Fecs
M adieu Soles m- tar sin9re r—my Hamel and C— dominiuma, Monroe County, 1996 -2016
511 912 01 7
Regional &Local Profiles
Household I.—
H ... eh,jd, by I-- and Cost Rod—, M-11-1 County, MIS
Elderly Households
9—h—hde.
fldujy H—h,ld, by Ag, a,d C—t B-een, M,,,,, County, 2015
.apply Ck—'—d-
Sin Ole Family H.— Su. and Ag.
Y— StII&III HIM, MIIIII County, 2010-2014 American Community Survey
H—mp C..dib— CharaReristics (Occupied Units), M..— C ... ty, 2010-2C 14 Amer Community S.—V
1 -,. 2 1 1 '. F
s I
http://flhousingdata.shimberg.ufl.edLdalprofiles?action=results&nid=4400
Additional Information added to File 2017.075
s
v
la ;ow /la;og pue 6ulsnog algepaojje 6ulpieBei ivawpuawe Oaf pasodoad - 6ul;aaw;oedwl 0008) IL uolslnab] IIIJOU sla;oH :;uawg3e; ;y
ro o
0 El
w
N4 a a
c
0
m
0
J
O Y
rt. 4 O N
j
+' x
e
_
A
z-
•
I
z-
s
v
ja ;ow /ja ;oy pue 6uisnoy algepaoe 6uipae6aa ;uawpuawe dal pasodoad - 6ui ;aapy pedwl 0008) I6 uoisinabl Illaall spa ;oH ; ;uawy' e; ;y N
T
Y
rn
00
. - —V on,
a
4 'S +
•
`Y p
N �d
• rb. . a°I�t,� � -
r
1 N
�l c
auk i
F
i U
w o
z ��
_qejo,pue emmm_jojjem_m ivawpuawe 2,pos aOAd -&! w pedw 0009 m « B H ] IIIJOUSIOJOH wLj3B m
-
.
7 \» . 0 El
. <«
� . .
% r �
/ .
� A
■�f®
7
_YNTM
/
ƒf
§)
f�' \
»
jolow/jejoLl pue BuisnoLl alqepjojje BuipieBei ivawpuawe 0a posodOAd - BuileaW joedwi C)DOS) ft UO!S!ABH] 111JO! _S1, , : IUOW P-11
- L 14 4D V
rn
rD
Ci
VI
la ;ow /la;og pue 6uisnog algepaojje 6ulpieBei ivawpuawe 0al pasodoad - 6ugaaW pedwl 0008) IL uolslnBH] IIIJOU sla;oH :;u8wg3e; ;y
lit
a
� � o
" 1
t
•
d
O
N
d
O
a
0
U
w �
0
Ae
®ate
o
s
O
J
-
�_ T
0
U
w �
0
N
0) 0
t0 C
61
a
d
Y o
V
10
IL
° a C
All
IF
°
>
•
x
• T / v�
jolow/jejoLl pue BuisnoLl alqepjojje BuipjeBaj juawpuawo DCj posadOAd - BuijaaW joedLul DDOS) U UO!S!AGU) IIIABUS1 WowLIDeRv
IV
l it "'A" 0 If.,
ii
4p
IL
l it "'A" 0 If.,
End of Additional File 2017.075