Agenda 11-16-2021; 8-a - Minutes

Browse Search

22 1 a property and wanted to stay in the neighborhood, the tax impact will be the same to them. 2 She said for future funding it could be treated one way if it is an heir property, even though it 3 would require more investigation for county staff. She said this would have to apply across the 4 county. She said she thinks this is an interesting concept if the property will be sold for 5 investment. 6 Nancy Freeman said if the property is being sold or passed down, there is still the 7 requirement that the property has been owned for 10 years, and that time clock would start over 8 again at that time. 9 Commissioner Hamilton said she looks at this program as a way to help people who 10 barely make enough to make ends meet, and to stretch money more. She said for these types 11 of residents clawbacks are needless complications, and each homeowner should be considered 12 on their own income. She said she understands the point of funding the program in the future. 13 She said this program can be viewed as a pilot and, based on impact, the Board can determine 14 whether to continue funding or not. 15 Commissioner McKee said he appreciated Commissioner Greene clarifying the 16 clawback on farm use, as it is not necessarily the seller who pays it, and is quite often the 17 buyer. He said the reason he brought that up because if the home is sold for development, it is 18 coming out of what the goal of the Board is. He said he doubts a buyer in Chapel Hill or 19 Carrboro will flinch at a few thousand more dollars for the necessity of covering the payback of 20 the subsidy. He clarified he is not interested in a generational clawback. He said he thinks the 21 program is trying to maintain the ability of residents to stay in their homes, while their home 22 values are increasing. He said he is glad to hear the reminder from Commissioner Richards 23 that this will be a countywide program, because a lot of discussion surrounds urban areas. He 24 said his only issue with program is the age requirement, and he would like to keep the focus on 25 the aging population near retirement age 26 Chair Price said she would like to see this program without age limits, since there are 27 other relief options with age requirements. 28 29 A motion was made by Commissioner Richards, seconded by Commissioner Hamilton, 30 to approve the proposed Longtime Homeowner Assistance program design, with the removal of 31 the age requirement. 32 33 Commissioner Bedford asked for clarification on whether or not the calculations Travis 34 Myren mentioned earlier only included those over age 62. 35 Travis Myren said no. 36 Commissioner Greene said she is struggling with the age, and age 50 could be a 37 compromise. She said since this is a pilot, would it be better to start with less restrictions and 38 add more later, if necessary, or have age limit now and open it up in the future. 39 Chair Price said she wants to keep people in their homes, regardless of age. She said 40 there are young families who may have lost jobs over the past year, but want to stay in the 41 same home. She said gentrification may continue, and it may be difficult to maintain income. 42 She said the point of the program is to keep people in homes regardless of age. 43 Commissioner McKee said if someone qualified based on AMI, and then changes jobs to 44 a higher salary, they be removed from the program. He asked if the 10-year ownership 45 requirement would reset at that time, and if all four criteria have to be met. 46 Commissioner Richards said that was her understanding from talking with staff. She 47 said if funds are available and this is a pilot, it should be open to more people since the 48 calculations were not limited to an age group. 49 Corey Root said the requirements all have to be met, but the 10-year requirement only 50 applies to home ownership. She said it does not require that someone make less than 80% 51 AMI for 10 years, for example.