Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
8 <br /> 6. Regular Agenda <br /> a. Review of Affordable Housing Bond Scoring Criteria <br /> The Board considered the following changes to the affordable housing bond scoring <br /> criteria: <br /> 1. Due to the inherent differences between new construction and the acquisition and <br /> preservation of existing housing, score and recommend new construction projects <br /> separately so that they do not compete with the acquisition of existing housing stock. <br /> 2. Define special needs populations as seniors, people with disabilities, veterans, <br /> individuals or families experiencing homelessness, and victims of domestic violence. <br /> The special needs score will be prorated based on the number of units dedicated to <br /> serving residents with special needs. <br /> 3. Define residency as households currently residing or working in Orange County. <br /> Clarify reporting to include marketing and recruitment efforts to Orange County <br /> residents and reporting requirements once the project is completed. <br /> 4. Eliminate the ability to pay property taxes as a scoring criterion since most affordable <br /> rental property is owned by a non-profit and exempt from property tax. <br /> 5. Eliminate the ability to repay bond funds as a scoring criterion since the focus of <br /> bond funds should be to serve lower income households. <br /> BACKGROUND: <br /> On June 6, 2017 the Board of County Commissioners awarded $2.5 million in affordable <br /> housing bond funds to projects that had submitted proposals through a request for proposal <br /> process. The County received six proposals from affordable housing providers. One of the <br /> proposals was incomplete, so five of the six proposals were scored using standard scoring <br /> criteria (Attachment 1). <br /> Based on the scoring criteria and available funds, four of the five remaining projects were <br /> recommended for funding. One of the projects submitted by EmPOWERment (606 Bynum <br /> Street) was not recommended for funding. The Board of Commissioners funded this project <br /> using other affordable housing funds appropriated in the Capital Investment Plan. <br /> During the discussion of the bond awards, the Board requested an analysis of the scoring <br /> criteria to determine why some projects scored higher than others. The following describes <br /> how the projects scored under each category as well as feedback from the Affordable Housing <br /> Coalition. A summary of scores by project is attached (Attachment 2) as well as a selection <br /> narrative (Attachment 3). Each project was scored using eight categories as described below. <br /> 1. Income Targeting and Special Needs <br /> The income targeting and special needs category awarded more points to projects that <br /> served lower income households. Up to twenty-five points were available to projects serving <br /> households with incomes under thirty percent (30%) of the area median income. All of the <br /> projects scored well for serving low income households. However, this category 1 also <br /> awarded an additional twenty (20) points to projects serving at least one special needs <br /> population. Both of the projects submitted by CASA as well as the project submitted by <br /> Habitat for Humanity earned the additional points for serving at least one special needs <br /> population. The EmPOWERment projects did not receive those additional special needs <br /> points. Affordable Housing Coalition members requested a clear definition of the special <br /> needs populations that would qualify for the additional points and a way to prorate the <br />