Loading...
Item O2 BOARD OF COU~TY COM.\HSSIONERS AGE~DA ITEl\l SUMMARY r'vleel1l1g Date: Oct, J 9.2005 Bulk !tem: Yes No X Division: Department: BOCC DISTRICT FIVE Staff Contact Person: DOMa Hanson AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Discussion and direction to staff to investigate the possibility of plactng a I % surcharge on an new and redeveloped building projects in Monroe County. This surcharge would be based on the total project cost including land acquisition. ITE!\I BACKGROt:r'iD: To provide 300 affordable homes per year for at least] 0 years, a large amount of capital must be raised, As there are currently 500~ 700 million dollars of rede\elopmcnt planned for Monroe County in the next year, this would provide for current and future needs for new \\orkforce housmg and maintaining of the existing housing stock. PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCe ACTIO~: CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHA~GES: STAFF' RI:::CO!\'IMF.~DATIONS: TOTAL COST: BUDGETED: Yes :';0 COST TO COC:"1TY: SOURCE OF FU~DS: RE\'E~LE PRODUCING: Yes No A\10UNT PER l\10:'>lTH_ Year APPROVED BY: COllnty Atty__," OMB!Purchasing _ Risk Management ,~'" DIYISION DIRECTOR APPROVAl,: M uyvay E. Ne4o-rv COMMISSIONER MURRA, Y E. l\ELSOl\' DOCU'lE~TA TIOl'\: Included X Not Requircd_ DISPOSITIO:"1: AGE~DA ITE:\l # Rl:\'lS~d 2 0:' AI~ _~ ~EIBERT L .A. \V F R M :.j: ";""'\t';r'11 6 l6.~11 "S~ ~~~~f;<'J Draft-Interim Conclusions of tbe Last Workforce Housing Task Force Sept. 28, 2005 At our Task Force meeting on Sept. 8, 2005 we built consensus on the following conclusions and hereby recommend them to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners: 1. There is a workforce housing crisis in the Florida Keys, and to some degree, it affects all parts ofMonrae County. 2 The response to this crisis will necessitate public/private partnerships and the creatlon of incentives for the private sector, including the use of regulatory relief 3, The response to this crisis \vill require signi ticant intergovenunentat coordination, at both the staff and policy-making le\'els, which coordination currently does not exist. 4, The response to this crisis demands bold govenunent actions, \vhich should include: ~the public purchase of land -the creation of, or greater use of existing, land trusts or other SImilar legal "vehicles" -the establishment of deed restrictions, or similar restraints on the future use of land, and these restrictions should be placed in perpetuity, 5, The need for workforce housing is great, and the deficit of such units numbers in the many thousands. We believe the goal of obtaining pennission to build, and building, 300 Ulllts of \vorkforce housing per year, for a ten year period, is a reasonable goal, 6, We acknowledge there vdU be a cost to administer a meaningful workforce housing program. Funds for such administration can COme from a variety of sources, but the need for such funds should be considered by the County COill.'Ylission. 7, The COUIlty Conunission should take all necessary steps to preserve and protect the existing workforce housing stock. g; 8. The County should immediately take action to change its local codes, and gain state govemment approval, for partial ROGO credit, i.e, a residential unit of750 square feet or less should COunt as .5 for ROGO calculations, 9. The current practice or taxing "non-homestead affordable housmg" at market rates is counterproductive, The applicable tax la\vB should be changed, We understand that "time is of the essence" in addressing this critical issue. Therefore, we make the recommendations you see above in an effort to support the Commission's efforts to date and urge some specific additional actions, We believe more \\iorkJstudy is required to address the tollowing issues in more detail: -funding sources for workforce housing q; -a calculation of the true need, including backlog, of the v>'Orkiorce housing cri si s -a pubhc communications strategy to support the "bold" government action described above ~the opportunities for preservation of existing affordable housing -methods to incentivize employers to build and maintain workforce housing -the appropriate administrative "home" for workforce housing efforts Accordingly, we respectfully request that the Monroe County Commission consider the specific recommendations set forth above and allow the "Last Workforce Housing Conuniuee" to continue meeting to address these other matters. 2 MINUTES \VORKFORCE HOUSIl\"G CO;\lMITTEE KEY COLONY BEACH CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 8~ 2005 MEETING The Workforce Housing Committee held a regular meeting on September 8, 2005, at Key Colony Beach City Hall. The meeting was caUed to order by James R. "Reggie" Paras at approximately 1 :20 p.m. Committee members attending the meeting were: Reggie Paras, Chairman, Jim Saunders, Dave Boerner, John Dolan-Heitlinger, Bill Loewy, Tim Koenig, Carol Fisher, Donna Windle, Ed Swift, Steve Seibert, Facilitator, Jerry Coleman, Attorney, and Stacy DeVa,'1e, Recording Secretary. Committee members absent: Maureen Lackey and Brian Schmitt Also attending were Mayor Dixie Spehar, Commissioner David Rice and members of the public. The minutes of the July 26,2005 regular meeting of the Workforce Housing Committee \vere approved. The meeting was turned over to Steve Seibert for a report on recent activities Mayor Dixle Spehar was recognized in the audience diid gave a report of the meeting she attended in Tallahassee with the Governor and Cabinet on September 7,2005, regarding the Cou.rlty's [nterlocal Agreement w1th Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority. The action taken will provide for 167 affordable units in Monroe County, with the ability to borro\v forward for up to ten (10) years. There was a150 a letter from Commissioner Murray Kelson, dated September 8, 2005, that addressed the actions taken at the meeting and listed some recommendations for the committee members to consider. Steve Seibert provided a recap of the committee meeting held on July 26,2005. He clarified the purpose of the Committee. The Conunittee members agreed that: . the purpose of the committee is to make reasonable recommendations (that can be implemented) to the Board of County Commissioners regarding affordable housing permits. . the affordable workforce housing crisis in the Keys is destroymg community character, which threatens to cripple the economy . this will require both public/private and a public/public partnerships because it is a Keys-wide lssue a..TId we must have the cooperation of the cities bet\veen the unincorporated areas of Monroe County. Land trusts and deed restrictions were discussed. The consensus was that the administration must be public and the entity has to own the land. It was recommended that \vhen an Ordinance is written, that a funding mechanism be built-in, such as a monthly maintenance fee, a percentage of the monthly rent, an additional tax (0 fund a governmental budgeted tine item, etc. It was decided that a sub-committee will meet v,ith the attorney regarding compliance with deed restrictions and what the deed restricLions should be over a long period of time, The sub-committee \\liB go over the mechanisms and give the Committee choices regarding deed restrictions. Local government buy-in: It was agreed that there is a lack of communication between entities and one entity doesn't necessarily know what the others are doing m regards to workforce housing pennits. Intergovernmental coordination is critical and a procedural resolution between the County and the municipalities was proposed as a regional approach, to agree on the process and to authorize and direct staff to cooperate and work together. Committee members will develop the unifonn system to be put in the resolution, The Resolution will be prepared and submitted to the Committee for approval before it goes to the County and municipalities for execution. It will then be provided to DCA to prove that there is a coordinated workforce housing effort county-\\ide. Fractional ROGOs were dIscussed where a 750 square foot unit would be a .50, and the DCA would approve it. The need for three bedroom homes was discussed and N 8"(1fi getting rid of the 4,5 multiplier cap on median mcome was suggested. It was agreed that a public information campaign must be launched if a funding sou.rce is necessary. A communications strategy would have be decided upon and put into place to get the infonnation out to the public for their support. This will be done once the cOrY'Jnittec has submitted the recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners, Due to the time that it will take to build affordable housing, the preservation of exlSting workforce housing units needs to be addressed. Available properties to preserve need to be identified, along with a funding source, A Preservation and Funding Committee \vill be formed to determine how to preserre and how to pay for the units. Steve Seibert will find a Chairrnan for the group. It was suggested that a data base of affordable housing units be collected and that the Committee needs to set goals and agree on the number of units that \ve want to have built. The Housing Authority currently has 500 applicants on v,iaitlist. We would need to build in tlexibility for local governments as they are not going to want to match the County's density. A member of the audience stressed that non-homesteaded properties are losing money paying ad valorem taxes and requested that a Resolution be sent from the BOCC to the State to enact legislation for the protection of affordable housing, and to give incentives to put affordable housing deed restrictions on property. It was brought up that if we are going to have a tax to fund affordable housing, \Vc should not look to the State to initiate the tax; \\'e would have to do it local1y. It was requested that a Resolution be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners, which would then be sent to the State representatives, Bill Loe\vy will carry this resolution to the municipalitIes to approve also. The committee members discussed the need to meet more frequently, and agreed to schedule meetings on the 2nd and 4th Wednesdays of the month, at 1 :30 p.m. The next meeting wil! be held on \Vednesday, September 28,2005, 1:30 p.m" at Key Colony Beach Clty Hall. The meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m.