Affordable Housing Policy Review & Project Recommendations

1. 9% LIHTC and HOME NOFA Policy Review &Project Recommendations • Tai Dunson-Strane, Tax Credit Program Manager • Natasha Detweiler-DabySenior Policy Analyst Oregon Housing and Community Services July 12, 2019 Housing Stability Council

2. Todays Presentation • LIHTC Framework Elements & Performance • MWESB • Total Development Costs • Vulnerable Gentrification Areas/Opportunity Areas • Preservation Set-Asides • Location Efficiencies • Housing Trust Funds • 5-year Look-Back on Geographic Distribution 2. LIHTC and HOME Project Recommendations

3. 9% LIHTC and HOME NOFA Review LIHTC Framework Elements and Performance Project Application Threshold and Scoring Criteria and Summary of Applications Received

4. Minority, Women, and Emerging Small Business Membership and Mission • Commitment to engage Minority Women and Emerging Small Business (MWESB) including contractors / subcontractors in the construction or operations of the proposed project. • Certified Firms through Business Oregon • Applicants submit their plan, and then once complete they will report their performance against their goals. • Some urban jurisdictions have established targets; much of the state does not. • Looking toward future implementation where we would have a comprehensive statewide approach to further this work. THRESHOLD ELEMENT – Must be submitted • Projects are also scored on MWESB and Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing strategies; giving preference to projects that go above minimum requirements. • 2019 recommended projects: all received points for these measures which together are weighted 7 points

5. Total Development Costs Membership and Mission • Baseline Total Development Costs are estimated for Urban/Metro areas v.s. Balance of State based on recent 5 years of funded 9% LIHTC project cost data with the idea that 80% of projects should be covered; excludes cost of acquisition. • Projects that don’t have costs within the established thresholds must provide narrative explanation. THRESHOLD ELEMENT – Must be submitted

6. Total Development Costs (cont.) Membership and Mission • 2019 Recommended Projects: • 92% of the projects selected had overall costs within the established Total Development Cost limit • Several had increased costs just for larger unit sizes • Of those with higher costs than established the explanations focused on: • Design that addresses community need • Large bedroom sizes • Construction Cost escalation • Davis Bacon Wages • Unique Infrastructure needs

7. Vulnerable Gentrification Areas/Opportunity Areas Membership and Mission • Projects receive scoring preference for being located in a: • Vulnerable Gentrification Area • With a Revitalization Plan / Strategy • High Poverty Qualified Census Tract • Concentration of Race/Ethnicities • Concentration of Low Educational Achievement • Concentration of Renters • Opportunity Area • Low Poverty Census Tract • High Ratio of Jobs to Population • Below Average Unemployment Rate • High Scoring Schools SCORED CRITERIA

8. Vulnerable Gentrification Areas/Opportunity Areas Membership and Mission • Vulnerable Gentrification Area: • Of the recommended projects, 4 projects received points for being in a Vulnerable Gentrification Area; • Includes rural project where the city was making deliberate investment choices that were serving to revitalize the downtown core; identified connections with those efforts

9. Vulnerable Gentrification Areas/Opportunity Areas Membership and Mission • Opportunity Area: • 7 projects received points indicating some evidence of being an opportunity area; projects get points for each criteria that is met • One projects maximized all points available • Balance of projects got an average of half of the points available – meaning their Census Tract had about half of the Opportunity Area criteria

10. Preservation Membership and Mission 9% LIHTC has a 35% Preservation set-aside within each region • LIHTC NOFA: 18 applications • 11 recommended for funding; 2 are Preservation projects • Metro Region: 1 Preservation project recommended • 21% of Regions LIHTC funds to Preservation projects • 21% of Regions LIHTC units are in Preservation projects • Non-Metro PJ Region: no Preservation projects applied • Balance of State Region: 1 Preservation project recommended • 20% of Regions LIHTC funds to Preservation projects • 23% of Regions LIHTC units are in Preservation projects • HOME NOFA: 1 application • 1 recommended; no Preservation project applied

11. Location Efficiencies Membership and Mission • Gives application preference to projects located: • In a Walkable Community (based on walk score) • In proximity to Major Grocery Store / Not in a Food Desert • With adequate Public Transit access/ adequate Transit Score • In proximity to Medical Services • In proximity to Public Schools or Libraries • Have different identified targets based on whether it is in a (USDA) rural area or not. 2019 Recommended Projects: • All 12 recommended projects received maximum points available, indicating that they were in a location efficient area; includes both urban and rural project SCORED CRITERIA

12. Serving Extremely Low Income Households Membership and Mission • 2019 NOFA was the second time that the Federal Housing Trust Funds (HTF) were offered; these are HUD resources specifically used to fund 30% AMI / Extremely Low Income housing units. • Focused gap resources on serving households earning 30% AMI / Extremely Low Income Households. 2019 recommendations: 231 of the 636 recommended units are able to serve Extremely Low Income households through income restrictions or project based rent assistance!

13. 5 Years of Competitive LIHTC Awards Membership and Mission

14. 9% LIHTC and HOME NOFA Review • LIHTC and HOME Project Recommendations 18 applications received. 12 projects recommended for Housing Stability Council consideration.

15. Process - Criteria

16. Process - Scoring • Applications Scored within 3 Regions: • Metro Region: Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington Counties • Non-Metro-Participating Jurisdiction Region: Eugene/Springfield, Salem/Keizer • Balance of State Region • 50% target for rural communities under 25,000 • 2019 recommendations: • 73% of Balance of State funds went to rural communities under 25,000 • 68% of Balance of State units are in rural communities under 25,000 • Rural communities are scoring well in the balance of state • Internal committees review Capacity, Financial Viability, and Data Driven Measures • External committee reviews Impact and Preferences by Region

17. Process - Overview • Staff assembled all scores from Internal and External Scoring Committees; evaluated ability to fund projects based on available resources and regional allocations in order to make overall funding recommendations to the OHCS Executive Team and OHCS Director Margaret Salazar • Director reviewed and made final funding recommendations to Housing Stability Council • Housing Stability Council takes action loans and grants equal to or greater than $1,000,000, more than half of the total development budget, or outside agency policy standards

18. LIHTC NOFA – All Applicants

19. LIHTC NOFA – All Projects Recommended

20. Metro Region • 5 applications submitted • 4 applications recommended for funding • 1 recommendation is Preservation • 228 units

21. Metro Region • Oregon City Terracein Oregon City, RPH Corporation • 48 unit preservation project serving large families, seniors, and people with disabilities • Rose Bowlin Portland, Cascadia Housing Inc • 71 unit new construction project providing permanent supportive housing • Going 42 in Portland, Community Development Partners • 55 unit new construction serving American Indian/Alaska Native households • The Mary Ann in Beaverton, REACH CDI • 54 unit new construction serving families

22. Non-Metro Participating Jurisdiction Region • 1 application submitted • 1 application recommended for funding • 60 units

23. Non-Metro Participating Jurisdiction Region • River Road Affordable Housing in Eugene, St. Vincent de Paul • 60 units new construction serving single, couples, and families at or below 50% AMI and survivors of domestic violence

24. Balance of State Region • 10 applications submitted • 6 applications recommended for funding • 1 recommendation is Preservation • 331 units

25. Balance of State Region • Rogue Valley Apartments in White City and Eagle Point, Chrisman Development • 76 unit preservation project serving families • Snowberry Brook II in Ashland, Jackson County Housing Authority • 71 new construction units serving family, workforce households, and homeless youth • Carnelian Place and Phoenix Crossing in Bend, Housing Works • 48 units in new construction serving seniors, homeless, veterans, and survivors of domestic violence • Applegate Landing in Lebanon, Applegate Landing LLC • 36 units of new construction serving families and veterans • Bridge Meadowsin Redmond, Bridge Meadows • 40 new construction intergenerational units • Patriot Heights in Stanfield, Umatilla County Housing Authority • 53 units in new construction serving individuals and families

26. HOME NOFA – All Applicants

27. HOME NOFA – Recommendations • Colonia Paz I in Lebanon, Farmworker Housing Development Corp • 24 units in new construction serving families and agricultural workers

28. Project Recommendations Motion for Consideration

29. HOME NOFA – Recommendations • Motion: To approve the funding reservation of the following resources, • Applegate Landing in Lebanon, $885,000 in HTF, and $1,855,000 in HOME • Bridge Meadows in Redmond, $778,125 in Gap, $1,089,000 in HTF, $1,029,010 in HOME, and $93,015 in MEP • Carnelian Place & Phoenix Crossing in Bend, $1,027,500 in Gap, $600,000 in HTF, $1,000,000 in HOME, and $17,640 in MEP • Colonia Paz I in Lebanon, $500,000 in Gap, and $2,759,915 in HOME • Going 42 in Portland, $1,023,750 in Gap, $1,271,000 in HTF, and $69,293 in MEP • Mary Ann in Beaverton, $1,078,125 in Gap, $1,129,904 in HTF, and $147,312 in MEP • Oregon City Terrace in Oregon City, $200,000 in Gap and $500,000 in HTF • Patriot Heights in Stanfield, $610,000 in HTF, and $1,148,000 in HOME • Rogue Valley Apartments in White City and Eagle Point, $200,000 in Gap, $500,000 in HTF, $500,000 in HOME and $42,442 in MEP • Rose Bowl in Portland, $400,000 in Gap, $700,000 in HTF, and $47,215 in MEP • Snowberry Brook II in Ashland, $750,000 in HTF, and $750,000 in HOME

30. FINAL THOUGHTS / CLOSING REMARKS Comments? Questions? Thank you.