Loading...
AHAC Minutes 04/18/2023April 18, 2023 1 MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, April 18, 2023 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Growth Management Department Building, Conference Room #609/610, 2800 Horseshoe Drive North, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Chairman: Steve Hruby Vice Chairman: Jennifer Faron Jessica Brinkert (excused) Arol Buntzman Gary Hains (excused) Commissioner Chris Hall John Harney Todd Lyon Planning Commissioner Paul Shea Mary Waller County Staff Members Present: Cormac Giblin, Planning Manager, Development Review Mike Bosi, Director, Planning & Zoning Derek Perry, Assistant County Attorney Jaime Cook, Director, Development Review Sarah Harrington, Interim Dir., Economic Development & Housing Julie Chardon, Ops Support Specialist II, GMD 13 April 18, 2023 2 Any persons in need of a verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the audio recording from the Collier County Growth Management Department. 1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE [The pledge of allegiance was recited.] Chairman Hruby called the meeting to order at 8:32 a.m. He told speakers they have to register prior to speaking and can speak up to three minutes, unless the time is adjusted by the chairman. If you’re disabled and need an accommodation to participate, you can contact the county Facilities Management Department. Devices for the hearing impaired are located in the County Commissioners’ Office. 2. ROLL CALL OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND STAFF Mr. Giblin called the roll call and noted Mr. Hains and Ms. Brinkert have excused absences. A quorum of eight was present in the boardroom. Planning Commissioner Shea asked what makes an excused absence versus unexcused. Mr. Giblin said it’s unexcused if they don’t provide notice. A discussion ensued over non-excused and excused absences. Planning Commissioner Shea said getting an absence excused bypasses having to show up. Ms. Waller said Ms. Brinkert is good when she shows up. Mr. Giblin said he will provide the complete attendance record and the ordinance/resolution next month so they can discuss it. Planning Commissioner Shea noted that at the Planning Commission it’s by permission and they vote on it. Chairman Hruby said if it becomes flagrant, the committee could tell her to either start coming or resign. We can force her to resign. 3. APROVAL OF AGENDA AND MINUTES a. a. Approval of today’s agenda Mr. Giblin said he has one addition from staff under New Business, a discussion over a possible change to the AHAC’s meeting date and time. We’ve been talking with Commissioner Hall’s office recently about changing it to a different time. Chairman Hruby asked if it was a discussion for a specific month or our general schedule. Mr. Giblin said it’s for the ongoing schedule. Chairman Hruby asked if anyone had an objection to that. [No one objected.] Ms. Waller made a motion to approve the agenda, as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lyon. The motion passed unanimously, 8-0. b. b. Approval of March 21, 2023, AHAC meeting minutes Planning Commissioner Shea said when he reads the minutes, there’s a tremendous number of action items buried in there. Is there a way we can highlight those to show they’re action items to keep track of them? Mr. Giblin said you can ask the minutes taker to make those highlights in the minutes. 14 April 18, 2023 3 Chairman Hruby suggested making them boldface. Mr. Giblin said votes and motions are typically highlighted. Planning Commissioner Shea said there are a lot of things that say somebody’s going to do something and they’re buried. They’re action items we’re not tracking. Chairman Hruby said that’s a good point. He gave kudos to the minutes-taker, calling it a very thorough set of minutes, probably one of the most thorough we’ve seen. It really documents what went on. Since we’re not videotaped, it’s great to have that level of detail, so thank you for your effort. It’s a lot to put together. Ms. Waller made a motion to approve the March 21, 2023, meeting minutes. The motion was seconded by Planning Commissioner Shea. The motion passed unanimously, 8-0. 4. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND PRESENTATION a. Committee Vacancies – Two Applications Chairman Hruby noted they have one vacancy and will have another soon and have two applications. Mr. Giblin said he spoke with the office that advertises the vacancies. The seats remain vacant until staff tells them to close the posting. So far, they’ve received two applications from Hannah Roberts and Susan Ryan, which are in your packet. We haven’t told them to close the posting yet. We have the seat vacated by former chairman Trachtenberg and possibly another seat coming vacant shortly, so we may keep it open until we have two seats to get a good slate of candidates. Chairman Hruby said he’s been talking with someone who’d be an excellent candidate. He was serious and we met twice to talk. He called last night to say he can’t do it for about six months due to commitments, so he said next time. He’d be an excellent candidate for the AHAC, so we’ll keep in touch to ensure he submits his application next time. Mr. Giblin said the two applications in your packet are informational only, just to let you know who applied. The posting will run for another 20 to 30 days. Chairman Hruby said this could be an action item for us at our next meeting. Mr. Giblin said we may try to wrap it up then. Action Item: Discuss the applications received for vacant seats at the next meeting. Planning Commissioner Shea asked what the requirement was for attendance. The Planning Commission’s policy is that if you miss two and it’s not excused, you’re done. Mr. Giblin said the county has the same attendance requirements for all advisory committees and subcommittees. Ms. Waller noted that some haven’t been attending and asked if they’ve been keeping track. Mr. Giblin said we can include an attendance summary in your next packet. Ms. Waller said they need to start recruiting earlier. Last year, we had a committee that couldn’t vote. We need to start our renewal process earlier so the seats aren’t vacant. Mr. Giblin said he’ll suggest to the County Attorney’s Office that seats that are expiring be advertised 60 days before their expiration date. Ms. Waller said if you advertise a few days before the expiration date, the seats will expire. They’re no longer a member of the committee. It needs to be advertised prior to the expiration date. You’re not allowing enough time for another. Mr. Giblin said he’d ask for 60 days. 15 April 18, 2023 4 Planning Commissioner Shea asked if they had to be specific about the expiring seats. Mr. Giblin said they do. Chairman Hruby said the seats are filled by category. [He then called the roll call so they can determine absences in the future.] Action Item: Ensure a roll call is taken to keep a running tally of absences and include the tally in the agenda packets. (The minutes title page shows absences.) 5. PUBLIC COMMENT [None] 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS a. Subcommittee Recap – J. Harney i. AHAC Work Plan Review Mr. Harney provided a report on the subcommittee’s work plan:  Jennifer put together an outline for a strategic plan, a work plan. The idea is to make it an ongoing, updated list of plans because we don’t have an ongoing work plan to determine where things are. In the past, we had initiatives and created those as part of the Local Housing Assistance Plan.  The LHAP is required by the state as part of the county ordinance that created the AHAC. There’s not much about meetings written down.  The idea is to create a plan we can work from. We reviewed the plan in depth at the last meeting and took a couple of items off because they’d already been handled or are about to be finished, so they’re not appropriate to move forward on.  We have a revised list that includes everything we feel is important going forward.  We had a lengthy discussion about the subcommittee’s work and redefined it. We decided it would largely decide what we talk about at the full AHAC meetings, rather than to be a score sheet that we work on. The subcommittee would screen issues on an ongoing basis before the full AHAC works on them.  There has been bloat in our meetings. Several things were presented here that maybe aren’t relevant for us to talk about. They took up a substantial amount of time over the last year or two. We have enough really important items to work on, so it’s better for us to sharpen what we’re working on and give it the time necessary, rather than be distracted by other things that have come in here.  Some items in the last year probably never should have gotten to the full AHAC. The idea is to have a good plan and have the subcommittee develop it, then have the full AHAC work to execute it. Chairman Hruby told the AHAC:  We’re not sure what to name the subcommittee yet. It works like a non-profit board, an executive committee that screens the agenda to keep board meetings efficient, on target and on time.  We discussed whether to meet every month or year and the consensus was to meet quarterly to update issues.  We discussed whether the subcommittee helps set the agenda and decided the most efficient way to set the agenda is as we’ve been doing it, with the chair, staff and Cormac sitting down about a week before the meeting.  He will be co-chair of the subcommittee with Mr. Harney to help tie it to the agenda. Mr. Giblin said it would be an ongoing subcommittee that would meet quarterly to basically steer the initiatives that would be discussed by the full AHAC. 16 April 18, 2023 5 Vice Chair Faron said it’s akin to the annual strategic planning that you’d see in private enterprise, where you do this toward the latter part of the year. Some things will roll off the list because they end, while some will continue indefinitely. The subcommittee would help set it up so we don’t spend a lot of time at the full AHAC discussing what we’re going to discuss. Chairman Hruby said the idea is to be more efficient. Commissioner Hall said he’s impressed with it. It’s a good tool to use. Kudos. Chairman Hruby noted that Jennifer compiled it. Vice Chair Faron said that everyone helped. We’ve done a lot of this work and the goal is that Commissioner Hall will be able to tell people what the AHAC is doing. It holds us accountable, gives the BCC comfort with what we’re doing and sets the stage for our agendas and discussions. Ms. Waller noted that it outlines different aspects that are recommended. These are to be recommended or these are already decisions that are made that AHAC is going to recommend. Vice Chair Faron said the idea is that these are concepts the AHAC will research, investigate and potentially come up with a recommendation to the BCC. We’d have recommendations we’d ask the BCC to approve. Some may not make sense due to research and staff time, but this is a starting point for the AHAC’s discussion. b. BCC Initiatives vs Live Local Act – M. Bosi Mr. Bosi reported to the AHAC:  He provided the Board of County Commissioners with the state’s ideas and those from the 2017 housing plan, which have parallel concepts.  The Live Local Act is a provision that prohibits jurisdiction, cities, municipalities and counties from holding public hearings when there’s an affordable housing proposal with at least 40% allocated to an income-level threshold identified within Florida Statute 420.004, which has low, very low and a gap in moderate ranges if you provide 40% of affordable housing at a minimum of 120% of AMI for a 30-year period.  If the project is commercial, industrial or mixed-use property, you can’t be required to go through a public hearing. You’re entitled to those intensities, the upper threshold.  If you have 40% of that and if you’re on commercial, industrial or mixed-use, then you’re entitled to the intensity and density of the highest level allowed within residential, where residential development is allowed within unincorporated Collier County right now, which is 91.77 units an acre.  The height you’re entitled to is three stories, or the tallest structure allowed commercially and residentially within one mile of your project, so it depends on where the project is. Within a one-mile radius, you’re entitled to the highest approved heights allowed within that radius. Chairman Hruby asked if that refers to the zoning requirements, all buildings that may be in a PUD. Mr. Bosi said if the zoning is a PUD. Chairman Hruby said if you have a 12-story building a mile away that’s already built and part of a PUD, that’s your benchmark? Mr. Bosi said that’s the benchmark, unless the PUD allows for even higher than what was constructed. It allows for what was approved, so it doesn’t have to be whether it allows for 150 feet, but they only built 120 feet. The project would be entitled to 150 feet. Chairman Hruby asked if it crosses borders. 17 April 18, 2023 6 Mr. Bosi responded that:  They can’t cross borders. The City of Naples cannot look to the county and the county cannot look to the City of Naples. It has to be within the jurisdiction, so you’re entitled to the height in that allocation that the one-mile radius provides.  The density allowed for the mini triangle is 92 units an acre and then what you’re required to do is go to your Site-Development Plan. You’re not required to go to a public hearing. You go to the SDP and the task is to provide for water management, landscaping, buffering, etc., that comes into play and make sure that can fit within the envelope of the height.  Most projects probably will not be able to accommodate 92 units per acre due to fit, unless there’s a really tall structure in close proximity (one mile) and it would be hard to get parking levels and all the units constructed within the height envelope. Chairman Hruby said financially, if you’re building a multi-story parking garage and 40% of the units are affordable, you’re not going to be able to pencil that one out. Mr. Bosi said we’ll definitely be dictating as to what and how much. They can take advantage of the allowances of the additional density and then it’s simply an SDP. Mr. Bosi continued his presentation, telling the AHAC:  Another parallel issue is temporary. Think about it in terms of how the application would be for the City of Naples. There’s another bill, Senate Bill 250, which says since the date of Hurricane Ian to October 1, 2024, no jurisdiction, municipality or county can approve any new, more restrictive land-development code regulations.  The City of Naples is proposing many modifications to its Land Development Code right now and is going through a lot of consternation over it. He’s not sure they recognize that Senate Bill 250 will put whatever decision they make on hold before they can implement those.  The City of Naples now has City Council sign off on SDPs. The requirement from the Live Local Bill is you get your intensity and your height that’s given to you, but you still have to go through the SDP process. In Naples, the SDP process is now political. They’ve created a conundrum that they’ll probably struggle with for a while, but we’re going to meet with the administration to try to provide clarity within our Administrative Code on how these projects may be able to move forward to take advantage of what Live Local Act says and creating rules for how that would move forward, what you’re entitled to with density and height, and then the SDP process.  The County Housing Plan recognized that commercial and industrial mixed-use were areas that were ripe for affordable housing by right, and that’s what the state did. The state recognized that scenario, that the intensities associated with those land uses traditionally have a higher trip generation than what’s generated by residential projects, so allowing residential to move forward without a public hearing is not as egregious of a step in isolation as it would have been because the intensity associated with residential development is less in terms of traffic generation than what commercial or industrial properties provide for.  Because of that thinking, the county and state were both in line. Our amendments mirror the same permissions in the same focus area that the Live Local Act provides.  He’s not the interpreter of the state statute. The court system is. Within the first year of this process, there probably will be a tremendous amount of litigation from jurisdictions and counties to work out kinks to determine how the act will be applied because anybody who reads the statute has found a lot of disagreement.  Some consider it straightforward, while others don’t. We may interpret it in a different way. There’s a lot of ambiguity that will be applied to the act and how it moves forward. 18 April 18, 2023 7  We’re going to craft potential ways to move forward, going to go to the Board of County Commissioners to ensure they agree this is the right application for how we can move forward. Chairman Hruby said there seem to be three options that our development community can follow, not only Live Local Act, but Sen. Bill 1339 and our four initiatives, when they become part of the Land Development Code, so we have a lot of flexibility to move from one to another, depending on what makes the most sense. Mr. Bosi agreed. There are more avenues now than there have ever been. Vice Chair Faron asked if they could talk about House Bill 1339. She understood it’s described as the silver-bullet option. If she’s a developer who wants to build 250 units and she has various regulations, how does HB 1339 play into what’s recently been passed by the BBC and the Live Local Act? Is it even a tool anymore? How would the BCC use that? Mr. Giblin said it can be used because this only applies to commercial, industrial and mixed- use. House Bill 1339 can be used anywhere and it’s for a county-initiated special project. Mr. Giblin described the differences:  Senate Bill 102, the Live Local Act, is like an anti-NIMBY law on steroids. It’s YIMBY, “yes, in my backyard,” and we’ve seen this initiative take place on the west coast and move this way. This is a direct result of decades of affordable housing developers getting beat up in every local Planning Commission, city hall and Board of County Commissioners meeting when they try to build affordable housing. They made their plea to the state legislature and the governor – and this is the result.  Basically, if the density was good enough for million-dollar condos at Metropolitan Naples and if the height was good enough for the Towers on Isle of Capri, then why isn’t it good enough for affordable housing? Chairman Hruby noted that it kind of levels the playing field. Mr. Giblin continued his explanation.  That’s the bottom line here in the Live Local Act. It doesn’t allow affordable housing to have any additional height or density than the county already has seen fit to approve for other types of projects.  We’re seeing that play out regularly in Collier, when we have 100 concerned citizens at public meetings who are always anti-affordable housing. This levels the playing field. Vice Chair Faron noted that he said it’s all going to get straightened out as it gets applied. There could be lawsuits and court cases, etc. Is there any concern on the part of staff on the murkiness that exists right now before it all starts? Or is it going to stifle some development because people want to wait to see what happens. What’s your thought on how this works in the meantime? A developer would want to get a shovel on the ground every day. Mr. Giblin said that in the three weeks to a month since the Live Local Act passed, he’s been getting calls from land-use attorneys, developers and builders asking how to apply, what’s the process, who do I call in the county to start? Our response has been, No. 1, it’s not effective until July 1 and, No. 2, we’re learning it as we go and we will get there with the process, but we’re not there yet. We need to figure it out. Mike’s advice to people walking in the front door and asking our front desk is to do a Zoning-Verification Letter to verify the highest building within a mile, what the density is, and then that can start the process rolling. 19 April 18, 2023 8 Chairman Hruby said it’s interesting that many folks are stepping up. This isn’t really discouraging. Ms. Waller said it’s good. Mr. Harney said it validates what we’ve been working on here locally, that builders are out there, they’ve been waiting for a change and they’re ready. He asked Mike about the recommendation to the BCC to approve the petition that gets sent to the state. Has the state DEO received our four amendments for review? Mr. Bosi said yes, they transmitted them within a week of that. Mr. Bosi elaborated, telling the AHAC:  We don’t anticipate that we’re going to have any comments from the state.  It’s an issue where they were trying to promote additional affordable housing. That’s something the state has been very supportive of, especially with the Live Local Act. What the state is offering almost outsizes our initiatives, so he can’t imagine the county will get comments other than a “no comment” from state agencies.  From that, we’ll take the LDC amendments associated with those Growth Management Plan Amendments and take them to the DSAC-LDR subcommittee this afternoon. They’ll go before the full DSAC in the next couple months and then will come back for adoption by the Planning Commission. The Board of County Commissioners will have the LDC Amendments that will implement the GMP Amendments, which will be second fiddle because they’ve already been heard once by the Planning Commission and the BCC. They’ll focus on the LDC implementation language for these initiatives. That likely will occur this fall. Chairman Hruby said moving ahead with that process toward the LDC amendments while the state is reviewing the Growth Management Plan Amendments is good. Any other comments? Commissioner Hall said that when he hears that the Live Local Act gives tax-credit equity as an incentive, how does that apply if he’s a builder and gets tax credit equity? Mr. Giblin said Michael Puchalla, executive director of the Collier County Land Trust, will address that. Mr. Puchalla told the AHAC:  The Florida Housing Finance Corp. manages both the 4% and 9% tax-credit programs, which have always been the No. 1 tool for affordable development. If a developer isn’t going to be charging market rates, it gives the equity needed to make their deal work, so they’re encouraging corporations to add additional money.  They’re creating this incentive for a corporate entity to get tax credits to invest their additional money into the sale program. It’s a mixture of the state having a tax-credit program, but allowing Florida’s corporate entities to invest an additional $100 million into the sale program, the State Department Incentive Loan Program.  That program offers financing at 1% for up to 15 years for a developer doing affordable housing, so they’re increasing the amount of money available in the sale program, which is huge for the affordable community, allowing corporations to invest up to $100 million into that program.  In exchange for that investment, they’re getting tax credits for corporate income tax and some of their sales tax.  Commissioner Hall said as a business owner or corporation, he can save actual tax dollars by putting them in there and then the fund that he put it into is XX percent. It’s debited out or subsidizes the deal to make it work. 20 April 18, 2023 9 Mr. Puchalla said the state Housing Finance Agency in Tallahassee is managing that and will be responsible for creating and managing the program. The state also is giving an extra $150 million a year for 10 years into sale, so they’ve got money going in now. They’re saying we can get up to an extra $100 million from corporations, so they’re increasing that pot of money for the development community. Commissioner Hall asked how a developer would tap into that and maximize. Mr. Puchalla told the AHAC:  There’s a yearly RFA process through Florida Housing Finance and developers know when they can apply. They’ll probably have special RFAs and there will be announcements from Florida Housing Finance Corp. when they’re ready to say they have a certain amount of dollars. They’ve even had additional money from Hurricane Ian, the Residential Rental Loan Program. That was a special announcement.  The development community knows they have workshops in Tallahassee where they can listen and get feedback. Once they’re ready, they can open up an RFA similar to what we do locally for our SHIP CDBG home funding. That’s available at the state level.  There’s also a Community Contribution Tax Credit Program. If you have a local project that’s a bit smaller, you also could fund that through the DEO to get a tax credit. They had up to $14.5 million per year available and are increasing that to $25 million at the state level. If it’s a small project, you could go to our local corporate entities to ask if they’re interested in funding it. You’d get a 50% tax credit if you put your money into this type of project and a developer could gain some units that they might find important while getting a tax credit.  It’s a do-good to get-good concept, a win-win, an increase for a local tax credit-type of project. Commissioner Hall said that helps. He’s out talking to people and others come to him to ask what they can do and how they could apply this. That will help him explain it better. Chairman Hruby said he gathered that those were a supplement to the presentation. You took each LDC amendment, identified the parcels, the number of acres and maximum density we could get and calculated the potential that would be out there – and it was phenomenal. Did you have about 27,000 market units and 14,000 affordable if we build everything out? Mr. Bosi said that’s if you build everything out and there’s a lot of redevelopment along density lines and transit lines. Chairman Hruby said that with your understanding of the county, planning and the development community, if you had a crystal ball, how much of this do you think is reality versus potential? We’ve had Empowerment Zones around major intersections for years and had an affordable-housing bonus there, but nobody participated. Do you think this is a different situation? Do you think developers will participate now? Mr. Bosi told the AHAC:  15-20% of those total estimates probably can be realized.  Planning attorney Rich Yovanovich felt the Live Local Act did nothing for his clients because they’re traditional builders who don’t think about where the benefit is.  For more traditional affordable housing providers who take advantage of tax breaks and government financing, we’ll look at that and the height and density allowances we provide for to make their projects work in a more economical way. The pro forma and performance limitations might not be able to resonate with the densities allowed for with the type of amenities and what this market demands. 21 April 18, 2023 10  What we’re probably going to need to experience over the next couple of years is to try to attract more affordable-housing builders like Rural Neighborhoods. That might be critical to seeing some of these projects move forward with maximum efficiencies.  There will be more affordable housing providers because we’re doing it now up to 22% with local builders. They do it because they need to get increased density. They’ll give you 22% and make it work, subsidizing their market rates off their affordable housing units.  The advantages of Senate Bill 102 sit within affordable housing providers and having the densities and intensities coupled with tax credits. If you target some lower- income levels, you get property tax abatements within the Live Local Act, another potential cost savings that can stretch the performance more.  There will be much to come over the next 1½ years. We need to have a robust or at least an effort at marketing to affordable-housing builders who aren’t in this market yet. We’re creating opportunities with the Surtax Subcommittee, the surtax money and filters we’ve created to tell them to bring us projects, here’s our scoring system.  You can use the four county initiatives or the Live Local Act. If they could bring an idea that marries those, we’re going to start attracting different providers who haven’t been in this market yet and that could yield additional benefits. Chairman Hruby said that’s huge because he deals with many housing developers nationwide, trying to encourage them to come to Collier County. They used to look at it, look at the numbers and the complexity of developing here and say, “No thanks. There are better ways of doing business.” Now that we have them coming to the table, and if this encourages more and there’s more competition, that’s a positive. Mr. Bosi said if you think about with the Community Land Trust and the $20 million we set aside for land acquisition with the entitlements that are provided for within the Live Local Act, you could have interest from developers who haven’t touched this market to see if they can get land that’s made available. We can couple this with our tax credits and the property tax abatements that are provided for and they can pencil together projects that could have a significant gain in terms of adding to the supply of affordable housing in this market. Vice Chair Faron told the AHAC:  She spent 11 years on the board of a not-for-profit affordable-housing developer in Chicago, Milwaukee and Madison, Wisconsin and looked at pro formas when she was on the Project Review Committee and the Finance Committee. This will help.  But you still have some of the same common denominator issues any developer has – construction costs, construction loans, turning to permanent loan financing and the high-interest rate environment. This is not the end-all, be-all. We still have external pressures that any developer does.  We could try to start to control big influences like construction costs.  She drove to Punta Gorda last Friday to look at CoFutures’ prototype of its prefabricated steel-panel housing, which Commissioner Hall brought to us last month. It’s a remarkable product. They have the process down to the minutes and seconds of how to build a house, a tremendous process and efficiency. But can they scale right and can other companies like that scale to the extent that we can encourage that kind of technology in Collier County?  She asked what it would take for CoFutures to come to Collier County. He said impact fees and the cost of land are problems, but there are some things that some of this will offset. Taking a look at the other side, new technology and building, some of that will take a long time to come online and CoFutures is still building its factory. It’s not yet scalable, but it was an interesting tour and she wondered how it would apply in Collier 22 April 18, 2023 11 County, if they could put up 36 houses in 30 days.  There’s a multi-use component where they can build two-, three- and four-story buildings faster, better and more energy efficient, which helps offset utility and maintenance costs, etc. The combination of those is what we need, whether it’s CoFutures or another builder, that kind of use as pro formas break on operating costs on a building going forward. It’s not just construction costs. They break on the operating costs, especially in affordable housing, where it’s a higher-intensity residential use. It’s got more social issues typically assigned to it with tax credit work, so we can solve some of this, but we still have ongoing pressures from other issues. c. Golden Gate Golf Course Development Update – C. Giblin Mr. Giblin told the AHAC:  The AHAC requested that we update you on where we are with the affordable- housing development on the Golden Gate Golf Course.  We’re planning a couple of agenda items that are going to the BCC for their next meeting. The executive summary is in your packet.  The BCC went out for an Invitation To Negotiate for a developer to build affordable housing on the portion of the golf course property in December 2019.  In November 2020, Rural Neighborhoods was officially approved and the developer agreement was approved by the Board of County Commissioners.  Since then, the property had to go through a Growth Management Plan Amendment and a PUD rezone to change it from a golf course to apartment-complex residential and various other uses that are divvied up on the old golf course property.  That took place and finished its process last year. During that time, Rural Neighborhoods was drafting architectural plans, a land-use plan, getting contractors on board and seeking financing.  They’ve applied to Florida Housing Finance through some of the programs Michael mentioned. The tax credit programs occur yearly and there’s typically an RFA (Request For Applications) released during a yearly cycle from Florida Housing Finance Corp. The project wasn’t successful in its first round, but was successful in its next round and they have a funding commitment for the essential-service personnel housing portion of the development, 250 family units.  There’s another component, an additional 150 senior housing units project that’s going through the process now and he’s seeking funding. He’s close to wrapping up a funding deal for the items we’re bringing to the BCC at its next meeting.  One is included in your packet, a few slight modifications to the original developer agreement. One is to reduce the lease area by just under two acres. One of the requirements when we redevelop a golf course into residential is that there be a 75- foot buffer around the entire old golf course area to buffer existing residential from what once was a golf course and which now will be multi-family housing.  Rural Neighborhoods asked that the strip be removed from its leased area and remain with the county for ongoing maintenance. That made sense to our Real Property staff because we’re going to be maintaining the balance of the property anyway. One of the minor tweaks is to remove the buffer strip from Rural Neighborhoods’ maintenance to county maintenance.  The next clarification is that some of the income targets in the agreement have been shifted. We’ve been successful in having them lower their target incomes and rents from what was originally approved. Originally there were some units at 140% and a greater mix of units at 120 AMI. We’ve been successful in reducing that and having them produce a more affordable product. That has to do with the fact that as time evolved, interest rates and construction costs went up. There’s been a need for Rural 23 April 18, 2023 12 Neighborhoods to apply for more grant funding, which comes with requirements that you target the lower incomes. Some of that has been driving the target incomes of the residents.  It also clarifies the construction timeline. In the previous version, it was dependent on the county completing the Growth Management Plan Amendment and the rezone. Those have been completed. Now the only outstanding item is for his financing commitment, which we’re going to give him. The draft says 12 months, but we’re probably going to give him six months to add urgency and move it to completion.  The other two companion items are the changes being proposed for the developer agreement. They’re going to be mirrored in the land lease as they’ve tried to fund the project and fill the funding gaps. He also applied for and will be awarded a $1.5 million county SHIP loan to help fill some gaps. In total, it’s an $82 million project for 250 units, just the ESP housing side, not the senior side. County sources that are going to help fund this are the land. That portion is valued at about $5.5 million. We’re going to be giving an impact fee waiver valued at about $5 million and the $1.5 million SHIP loan.  Two other sources will come into play and they’re going to be blended both on the ESP side and the senior housing side, which is going to be receiving a roughly $2 million state HOME grant, from the federal HOME program, and about a $4 million grant from the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) program. It’s money from the Treasury Department that involved the coronavirus that can be used. Now that the coronavirus pandemic is largely gone and paid for, the Treasury has a lot of idle money sitting on its hands, so they’ve consistently been increasing allowable uses. One is affordable housing, so there’s $4 million from that,.  In addition, this project came to us through a partnership with the Community Foundation of Collier County for a $10 million grant. Those are the public and non- profit sources that are helping fund it. The rest of the $82 million is up to him finding financing, which he’s well on the way to doing. Mr. Harney noted he said impact-fee waiver, rather than deferral, so those impact fees would be removed? Mr. Giblin said the county’s impact fee program has a 10-year deferral for rental housing. As the developer plugged that into its pro forma, it was nice, but it wasn’t. He still had to pay those fees, either over 10 years or have a balloon payment in 10 years. In negotiations directly with the County Manager’s Office (Amy Patterson used to run our impact-fee department, so she’s probably the most knowledgeable person in the county regarding impact fees), she has sought outside legal guidance and thanks to some changes in state law, she’s confident that through the use of a land-use restriction agreement for 99 years, we can waive those. We’ve already owned the land for 99 years and we have those restrictions in place. Mr. Harney do you foresee the possibility that impact-fee waivers might be available for other projects in the future? That’s important. We’ve never seen that before, right? Vice Chair Faron said during discussions about that project, she understood there was still an outstanding environmental issue involving the golf course and a discussion on who’s going to pay for the study and remediation. Has it been resolved so he can move ahead once he gets his financing? Ms. Cook said as far as the outstanding environmental issue, they’re still conducting soil testing and the county is behind all of it. They’re paying for the entire golf course. Vice Chair Faron asked if it’s necessary, would the remediation be paid by the county, or who would pay for that? Mr. Giblin said he spoke with the developer yesterday and he indicated he was hopeful on 24 April 18, 2023 13 this issue, so he was surprised to hear his optimism. They’ve done the testing on the golf course site and found chemical infiltration, but what he said was they found it virtually at all depths. It wasn’t just on the surface, it was on the depth. He has DEP guidance to do mirror tests at a nearby school site or a government-owned facility nearby. If they find similar levels in those tests, then what was found on the golf course may be deemed background and he may be on the way toward a less involved mitigation. Chairman Hruby told the AHAC:  He’s confused about the $5.5 million worth of land being put into a land lease and it’s going to be in trust.  The way he reads the paragraph, it appears the county is going to reimburse itself from the surtax fund for that land. He was under the impression that wasn’t the intention of the $20 million. His understanding is if you had county owned land and you donate it, you don’t get reimbursed. What’s going on?  This committee has constantly been saying that $20 million shouldn’t be for dealing. We heard rumblings about it being used for reimbursing the purchase of the golf course. The AHAC was pretty much advising against that.  If you’re going to take $5.5 million dollars to reimburse yourself, you go into the Housing Trust Fund, not General Revenue. No. 2, there’s a larger policy decision here about how you use county land. If county land is going to affordable housing uses, it should be donated and not reimbursed, whether it’s philanthropic or our penny tax. As a committee, we should talk about what kind of policy should be established for the use of county land.  That’s taking 25% of our valuable $20 million to reimburse the county, which isn’t a great public image right now.  He’s not sure how the AHAC feels, so he wanted to bring it up for discussion. Mr. Harney said several other projects we’ve talked about have been taking some part of a park land like that as part of something the school district is involved in. Would they expect to be reimbursed when an affordable developer comes in? Mr. Giblin said this wasn’t land that was sitting in surplus and owned by the county, like the parks. This was purchased specifically for housing, so infrastructure funding was available. Those decisions were made by the prior County Manager and county administration who are no longer here. At the time, this was contemplated to fund at least some of the golf course acquisition. Chairman Hruby said he’s not saying you have to unwind it because it may be too far down the road. But it’s a red flag that maybe there needs to be a more aggressive policy for the use of any land the county buys or owns. That’s what he wants to discuss. Look how many millions of dollars we contribute for conservation land and put in trust and nobody gets reimbursed. Why can’t we do the same for affordable housing? Ms. Waller asked if it was originally set up that any land the county sold or got reimbursed on that funds would automatically go into the Housing Trust Fund. Her recollection is that if the county sold land, the funds acquired from selling that land would go into the Housing Trust Fund. Mr. Giblin said that would occur if a piece of land was bought with impact fees, and 20 years later, it was sold. The original funding source gets paid back if there’s any excess. Ms. Waller said she’s always said they were going to figure out a way to get the $20 million to go to the golf course. That $5.5 million that you’re going to get, what is that considered? Mr. Giblin said the county is looking at it like the county is already in the negative $20 25 April 18, 2023 14 million. It was $25 million, so we’re already in the hole and we want to reimburse ourselves. Mr. Harney said that begs the question for establishing long-term, regular replenishment of the $20 million Trust Fund. If you take 25% of it away, something else may come along. At this point, there is no established annual replenishment program set up for the fund. Vice Chair Faron told the AHAC:  She wasn’t certain she objected to that. The county didn’t have to purchase that land. It could have gone to any use.  This predates her involvement or knowledge of it. Imagine if that parcel had been sold to the highest bidder and was used for something else and there was no affordable housing there or limited affordable housing.  The county made a substantial investment in that land. The $5.5 million, if it swaps funds and goes from the surtax fund back to whatever fund it comes from, the county is still making a substantial investment. The $5.5 million is being reimbursed. The county has still paid how many hundred million dollars for it, so she doesn’t see an issue. She’d have a larger problem if it were a piece of county land that’s always been county land for a long time that wasn’t saved from being something else. This golf course was saved and then you’re reimbursing, charging a fee for something for that use of the land, and you’re using the surtax fund to reimburse the county.  This feels different. She’s uncertain how the funds move and where this $5.5 million goes to. If the surtax fund writes a check theoretically to the county where it goes to the general fund, etc., but that frees up money for other things. She has no objection.  It’s different from if it were regular county land sitting around a long time. The county saved this land from being something that may not have supported affordable housing. She appreciates that the county wants to get some money back to reinvest in something else. Chairman Hruby responded:  His point is more policy driven and we’re dealing with policy. He’s making an issue of this because there was a reason. What happens the next time if 50 years ago they paid $1 million for this park?  We need to think about it in this environment, in this marketplace, how the county deals with land it may purchase or may already own. What’s the policy for it? Are you going to get reimbursed? Where does that money go? Should it go back into the Housing Trust Fund?  He’s not trying to unwind this because the deal is done, but it begs the question of how do you deal with these things in the future? That’s an issue we may want to ask county commissioners. “How do you feel about this? What’s its policy?”  That may have implications for future affordable-housing development. If you’re using your own land, where does this land rest when you’re putting it in trust? How can you be assured these projects will mainly be maintained as affordable housing. He wanted to discuss that, not that you can’t take that $5.5 million and reimburse yourself. That deal is done. Commissioner Hall told the AHAC:  He’s thinking about it as if it were his property. If he has property and wanted to give and he wants to sell it to someone and they purchase it, then he has money he needs to do something with. He can put it back in the Housing Trust Fund, pay off debt and do whatever.  If he has property he doesn’t want to sell but wants it to be used for a greater purpose, then he can lease the property and he’d have monthly cash flow coming back to him 26 April 18, 2023 15 that he could do anything with. He could reimburse a fund that he used to purchase his property or use it however he needs to.  If he sells the property, it’s gone. However, if he sells the property to a non-profit that pays no taxes for the use of that land it’s being used for a good purpose, but that land is never producing back to him. But at least you know there’s no ad valorem taxes coming back for the public good. There is cash flow from the lease coming back.  It’s not like it’s a policy set in stone. As Cormac said a few meetings ago, it’s on the deal side, so everything should be looked at to see what makes good sense. Chairman Hruby asked if he thought there should be some guardrails as to where it goes. Commissioner Hall said the purpose is to incentivize people to be able to build houses. In doing that, what if the county wanted to finance the whole thing and take principal and interest payments? Then you can’t cry foul because the interest coming back to the county is not being used to go back into a Housing Trust Fund. The county is creating money for that purpose. Chairman Hruby said that’s another formula that actually works because it does take the cost of land out of the equation for the developer and you get some return on your investment. Commissioner Hall said you get beat up as an investor, you get beat up for being the rich guy, you’re taking advantage of everybody. No, you’re allowing people to live in a place that they want and love. If you’re the one that’s taking the risk, you’re not the bad guy, you’re the one that’s creating that. The county is not always the bad guy in those situations. Planning Commissioner Shea said he wondered if they would be having such a big discussion if they were only dealing with $20 million and don’t know where the rest of it’s coming from. Are we going to create some kind of sustainable funding, in which case these issues won’t be as critical as this appears to be. Commissioner Hall said somebody could come along right now, buy property and spend the whole $20 million and it’s gone. But if thoughts were put into the deal to where it could come back and replenish it, that’s a better deal. The end game is the same. The assets get built. Chairman Hruby said on the Land Trust side, we’re looking at doing exactly that with donations coming from foundations where they won’t be grants. They will be very low- interest loans over a long term with a possible forgiveness aspect at the end of the deal, but it will take the high cost of the land out of the equation. Commissioner Hall said another thought he had while Mr. Puchalla was talking is that the state has programs that offer tax credits for corporations and we’re preempted with the local decisions. What if the county created its own fund that corporations within the county or within the region could donate back and get the same tax credit? Then we can use our money. We don’t have to apply once a year for that money. What if we had our own private capital funding that offered tax credits? Vice Chair Faron told the AHAC:  There’s something to be said for that because, having worked as a board member on the tax-credit side, it’s an incredibly competitive process to get tax credits. It’s not like you just show up, apply and you get them.  You’re scored and it’s competitive, so it’s not easy. Tax-credit financing is one of the hardest sources of capital to obtain. It’s important and it’s the major way a lot of these low-income housing communities are developed because it sometimes offers dollar-for-dollar tax credits right off the top of somebody’s income tax. 27 April 18, 2023 16  Insurance companies and banks buy these tax credits to offset their federal income taxes. The concept works because people want to reduce their taxes, so it’s an interesting concept about what else could be done at the county level.  But it’s difficult to get these tax credits and takes a long time It’s very creative. Florida is one of the most competitive environments for tax credits. Illinois is tough and Wisconsin is a little easier, so you’re at the mercy of that process. Commissioner Hall said his point is if we did it locally, it would eliminate a lot of that competition going after those funds and it would incentivize local business. Mr. Harney thanked him. Chairman Hruby said the subcommittee could address the issue of policy for the use of land and resources on the county level. Maybe it’s something we want to discuss and make a recommendation to the full AHAC committee to take to the BCC. Action Item: Address the purchasing policy and county resources at the next meeting. d. The Haven GMPA & PUD – Proposed BCC Date May 23, 2023 – C. Giblin Mr. Giblin updated the AHAC on the Haven GMPA and PUD:  He noted that the AHAC asked to be brought up to speed on projects that are working their way through the system and heading to the Planning Commission or the BCC.  This is a Growth Management Plan Amendment with an accompanying PUD amendment. It’s at the corner of Airport Road and Orange Blossom Drive between the Bear Creek Apartments and The Carlisle senior-living facility, kind of behind the Italian American Club.  They’re proposing to build 336 rental apartments and in exchange for that, they are proposing to designate 22.6% of their overall units as affordable housing. Split between 38 units rented at 80% or less of median and another 38 units at 100% or less of median. That’s 72 units out of the 336 that are proposed to be long-term affordable housing for 30 years, monitored by the county yearly with income-limit checks through our monitoring section in Community & Human Services.  They went to the Planning Commission last week and received a 6-2 recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners. It was an all-day hearing and probably over 50 public speakers, with about 100 people there. All but one speaker, the general manager of The Carlisle next door, spoke in opposition. All the neighborhood opposition came from residents along Orange Blossom Drive, where the county library sits on the corner. There’s also the Villages of Monterey and Mill Run and other PUDs. They opposed it due to density and traffic, even height.  The developer made some concessions throughout the design process where what they proposed now does not feed any traffic out to Orange Blossom Drive. The only access in and out is off Airport Road and a shared access with The Carlisle.  It’s scheduled for a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners on May 23.  All the residents along Orange Blossom Drive wore orange shirts. There was a sea of 100 people sitting in front of him waiting for their turn to talk, so that will occur during the BCC meeting.  If anyone wants to go and learn more about the project or support it, you’re welcome to attend. Chairman Hruby said it’s ideal because that affordable housing component can house some of The Carlisle’s staff and it’s within walking distance. Mr. Giblin said The Carlisle’s director attended the meeting via Zoom to just monitor it. By 28 April 18, 2023 17 the end of the public speakers, he was the last one still there and commissioners called on him. He said he wasn’t planning on speaking but said it would be helpful for his employees to have housing next door. Part of the deal offers additional employee parking to The Carlisle because they work on shift and are sometimes double-staffed, so they need additional employee parking. He said it would be helpful for some employees to live closer to the facility. Mr. Harney said this would seem to be the model of what we’ve been talking about for months, building affordable units next to where people are working, whether it’s putting that affordable building into a shopping center building and near the hospital, wherever that it. This is what we want people to do and if this is successful, and it appears that it will be based on the changes that have been made, this can easily be pointed to as the direction we want to go in. This is how it can be done. It’s great to see. Mr. Giblin said this is the model of the recent Growth Management Plan Amendment, with a combination PUD amendment at the same time seeking additional residential densities in exchange for providing for a community need, which, in this case, is affordable housing at about 11% low income. Ms. Waller asked if traffic on Orange Blossom was the biggest objection. Mr. Giblin said that, and height. Mr. Bosi told the AHAC:  The height is 60-feet maximum.  One of the things we pointed out within the public hearing process is the environment in which this is being proposed is that it’s near Bear Creek to the south, which in the 90s was an affordable housing project developed at 12 units per acre.  All four of those quadrants on the intersection are non-residential, but Orange Blossom residents were portraying the area as a residential community. We said that is most certainly not designated and allocated as residential. It’s non-residential, with higher intensity residential units sitting to the south and then below those two residential units is a string of commercial industrial zoning. There are two Activity Centers within 1-1½ miles of this location, so economic opportunities are pretty prevalent within area.  This is the model of what we’re trying to promote, higher-density allocation within areas of high employment, so staff was pleased with the recommendation that we received from the Planning Commission.  We know we’re going to have opposition by residents before the Board of County Commissioners, but we feel that close to 25% of the units are going to be dedicated to affordable housing. That’s significant. We think it has a community benefit, so we’re for approval.  If anyone wants to show up to provide another voice of advocacy for affordable housing, it would be welcomed. The majority of speakers will be speaking against it. Chairman Hruby said there’s nothing wrong with this being in your neighborhood. It will be attractive and support people. We need to be working in our neighborhoods and be a service. This could be a model. Mr. Giblin said it’s one of several that have come in and there are more in the pipeline following the same model that are going through Neighborhood Information Meetings and public meetings now. Ms. Waller suggested they send a letter recommending approval to the BCC. Mr. Giblin said that would be up to the AHAC. Chairman Hruby asked if the AHAC have an opinion on that? 29 April 18, 2023 18 Planning Commissioner Shea said you’re only hearing one side, so you’re voting on your side and not on their side. How do you vote on something if you don’t hear both sides? Vice Chair Faron said this is what they discussed in the Strategic Plan Subcommittee, an endorsement. What does that really mean? It’s important to have a group of volunteers appointed by the BCC who say we support the concept and we’re not looking at the whole deal, that’s not our job. We’re looking at the policy of allowing a project in this area. AHAC has a role in endorsing it for the reasons that it supports another 72 units of affordable housing. Maybe it’s ceremonial, but that’s OK. It’s ceremonial to show up at one of these meetings and support it. There is a role for AHAC to have an endorsement option. Planning Commissioner Shea said if that’s the case, then anything that has affordable housing, we’re going to automatically endorse it? Vice Chair Faron said no, staff thinks this is an important issue for the county. You have to rely on staff expertise, all the factors we just talked about and support staff recommendations. It’s the support of the project. Ms. Waller said when we speak at the meeting, we should go with the consensus of the entire meeting. We can’t do it both ways. We should have the AHAC vote as a committee to do it on May 23. We need to make a decision. If you go by yourself, you can represent your personal views, but if we vote, we can advocate for the AHAC. Chairman Hruby asked how others felt. Mr. Lyon said we should be in support. Our role is to advocate the best we can and with us, there are numbers and an organized committee versus an individual speaking up for it. Chairman Hruby said he’s right. We’re advocates, we’re volunteers. When we’re advocates, we recommend to the county commissioners, just as that group of citizens or advocates wants to protect their community. It’s the job of county commissioners to weigh this at the dais and decide. They’re hearing the community and staff. It’s not our job to weigh that. It’s our job to advocate for what we think is right. If Cormac said this is in the middle of a gated community and neighbors are up in arms, it would not be the right place to put affordable housing. But maybe we want the letter to say why we’re supporting it – because it’s in a properly zoned area, supports jobs for a local industry and is a model we’d like to see. Mr. Bosi told the AHAC:  You could endorse the policy decision of the Board of County Commissioners.  If someone is asking for additional density with a Growth Management Plan, as this is, there’s a policy decision behind it. The policy decision is 22.6% of that additional density will be set aside for affordable housing, so you could support that policy decision without getting into specifics of the dynamics of what they said and who’s for and against.  But you are supporting the board on a policy decision the board has made, not explicitly, but through their actions.  If you’re going to increase residential density through a GMP Amendment, 22.6% of those additional units are going to be allocated to some form of income-restricted housing and that’s what we’ve been operating under for the past 1½ years.  The AHAC can get outside the politics of the issue and support the continuation of the policy of providing for affordable housing when an applicant is asking for a Growth Management Plan to increase residential density above what’s allocated. Chairman Hruby said you’re saying we should recommend this because it’s consistent with ongoing policy for increased density and also is a GMP Amendment. Mr. Buntzman questioned if it’s really providing affordable housing for the people who work 30 April 18, 2023 19 at the senior center. He’s not sure many of the employees make $80,000 a year. Most are making a lot less, about $40,000-$45,000, so it’s not really providing affordable housing for employees working next door. But it’s a good project and should be done. He likes the idea of supporting a policy that says if you’re increasing density, you provide affordable housing. Commissioner Hall said having a voice as a committee is possibly louder than an individual voice. Our four initiatives require at least 30% affordable housing. State law now says 40% affordable housing. You could beat your drum as a committee and say we would like to see a bigger percentage of that project be affordable for the density and the changes, instead of just saying the word “affordable” is in there and there’s a 22% token, and Planning Commission approved it You could toot your horn a bit. It would come from the AHAC. Planning Commissioner Shea said that’s why it was a 4-2 decision. They weren’t getting as much versus the impact to the community. That’s the decision you’re constantly making. What is the overall community benefit? What is the overall impact to the local community? And it seemed like they weren’t giving enough. That’s why he voted against it. Mr. Harney said it seems we’re in a transitional period now because the Live Local Act and our four amendments aren’t in effect yet. In the meantime, there’s this project and a decision has to be made. Once the Live Local Act and the four amendments are fully effective, then we can talk about that 40%. We can’t today because there’s nothing out there in regulations, so in the meantime, we can endorse this project because that’s what the rules are today. Planning Commissioner Shea said they get more worried about what the commissioner is saying in the future. Ms. Waller said she agrees, but we should just try to focus and look ahead and say, OK, even though that’s what it says, 27%, we could ask for our 30% because we know that’s what we do want. That’s what we’ve been asking for all along. Mr. Harney said the department has been after 22% until things change. Mr. Bosi said they’ve put the allocation at 22.6%. That’s what we’re asking for when we have a GMP Amendment seeking residential density. He cautioned the AHAC not to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Going in and saying you want more to a proposal heading to the Board of County Commissioners could throw a monkey wrench into the process. Mr. Harney said that would be fair when we’re talking to developers coming to Cormac and they want to do something new. We should tell them that by the time their project is done, that’s the direction we’re going in and that’s where we’ll be. Mr. Giblin provided background on the 22.6% requirement:  One of the first developments that went through this was Hacienda Lakes. They were going through negotiations on the fly before the BCC, which was considering asking for 25%-35%. The developer opened up their pro forma, their books. They told us this is what we can do to make a profit, a financeable project for our bank.  As a result, 22.6% was built into that. The developer had a certain land cost in Hacienda, costs for development, construction, time and interest rates. This was several years ago, so some factors may have gotten worse since then. Maybe his land costs were different for that site, so maybe in the future look at this in a holistic way.  Since Hacienda, every deal has been based on the mechanics of that deal. Mr. Harney said by the time they get anything done, we’ll be operating under the state or county rules, so we’ll tell them that’s where we’re going. But for anybody who’s this far along in the pipeline, the rules are 22.6% of the total number of units and the percentage of AMI. Planning Commissioner Shea said two commissioners who voted against at the Planning 31 April 18, 2023 20 Commission meeting felt that we were giving away much more. He gets worried about what Commissioner Hall was saying. Just because it’s affordable housing doesn’t mean it’s the right place. That’s the Planning Commission’s dilemma. The challenge is that he knows it affects developers’ pro forma. We feared we were giving away much more. Chairman Hruby said in our jurisdiction, with AMI so high, that’s market rate in most of the state, a high market rate. What do we want to do? Are we in favor of sending a letter stating that we’re supporting this because it’s consistent with existing policy for GMP amendments for higher density and we want to direct staff to issue a letter to the Board of County Commissioners? Ms. Waller made a motion to direct staff to send a letter to the BCC to say the AHAC supports The Haven at North Naples’ GMPA and PUD because it’s consistent with existing policy for GMP Amendments for higher density. The motion was seconded by Planning Commissioner Shea. The motion passed unanimously, 8-0. Staff Action Item: Staff was directed to draft a letter to the Board of County Commissioners to say the AHAC supports The Haven at North Naples’s GMPA and PUD because it’s consistent with existing policy for GMP Amendments for higher density. Chairman Hruby asked Cormac to draft a letter and send them the draft. 7. STAFF AND COMMITTEE GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Giblin introduced Sarah Harrington to the full AHAC, noting that she has accepted the position of interim Economic Development & Housing Director for the new division. She’ll be doing that on an interim basis to evaluate it. For those six months, he’ll still be here assisting her, helping her as she moves forward. Ms. Harrington introduced herself and thanked the AHAC for doing this. 8. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Giblin said management requested that the AHAC move its date and time to something closely mirroring the DSAC meetings, a regular weekday once monthly in the afternoon, such as 2 or 3 p.m. We’ve got commitments and it can’t be on a BCC or Planning Commission day, or the day DSAC meets. He’ll work with Commissioner Hall’s office on selecting a day and week. Are there any days committee members can’t attend? A discussion ensued and the following points were made:  Chairman Hruby said Thursdays don’t work for him.  Mr. Giblin suggested the first Tuesday of the month at 3 p.m.  Chairman Hruby said that for those who work, 3 p.m. would kill their day.  Mr. Giblin noted there’s a line outside the GMD door at 7:30 a.m. each day, waiting to get in. Staff and directors hit the ground running to help the development industry, so afternoons are easier to manage.  Chairman Hruby asked for as late in the afternoon as possible, 3-4 p.m.  Commissioner Hall noted that it gets into traffic and supper time.  Chairman Hruby said when you have a business, starting a day after a morning meeting is easier.  Planning Commissioner Shea noted that many already blocked these dates in their calendars.  Mr. Giblin said they’d like to start the change in May. 32 April 18, 2023 21 Commissioner Hall told the AHAC:  Next month may be a problem.  He’s had discussions with staff and we want this committee to be very relevant, which it is, but we’re at risk of losing some of that.  We’ve had discussions about moving this meeting to every other month or quarterly. A lot of the committee’s main focus was accomplished, as far as recommending reviewing policy and sending something to the Board of County Commissioners.  With the Live Local Act and the four county amendments, we’re kind of powerless as far as reviewing policies or making recommendations. That’s kind of finished.  What we can do is move toward promoting things and by allowing some time to accumulate between meetings, we can become aware of what the market is producing and where we can promote projects. We can promote opportunities we’re hearing about and market that.  We’ve established the rules for free enterprise to do what they do best, build assets, so we can move to promoting projects and processes, such as someone coming before us to detail a plan.  Someone showed up at his office and said he’s ready to go, he has property and wanted to know how to move forward.  If we can become aware of the process and being influential there, that would be something the committee would be strong on, as well as financial opportunities. For Rural Neighborhoods, financing was the major obstacle, so if we become aware of grants or private-capital groups, etc., we can promote those as we learn about them.  That frees up everything the county does for us. This is above and beyond their real jobs.  If we need to meet monthly and we can be relevant and do something productive, that would be good. But we also should think about every other month or quarterly, and if we need to schedule another meeting, we always can. Any thoughts about that? A discussion ensued and the following points were made:  Less frequent meetings might work.  Vice Chair Faron noted that staff was going to fill in the work plan with the current status and next steps, so we can review it and determine if it should be quarterly, every other month or every six months.  Most of us have other work commitments, so freeing up time would be good.  We should make a decision within a month and stay on task.  A two-hour meeting would be effective and reduce the impact.  We need to get comfortable with our strategic objectives.  Chairman Hruby disagreed, noting there’s a lot going on in the county and state, so it’s in flux. There may be policy adjustments and a review required. Maybe we can meet every other month, but he doesn’t support quarterly. There’s too much activity going on, but maybe we can take a summer recess.  Planning Commissioner Shea worried they’d lose track of each other.  Ms. Waller noted that these plans don’t come out quarterly. She asked that they maintain monthly meetings.  Planning Commissioner Shea said when they meet to put the agenda together and there’s nothing worthy of a meeting, we can cancel it. He suggested leaving it monthly.  Chairman Hruby noted that he and Cormac sit down to discuss the agenda monthly.  Vice Chair Faron said the work plan can go out as an attachment for everybody to review for their information. They don’t need a meeting to discuss it. 33 April 18, 2023 22 Ms. Waller noted that they haven’t seen the rental inventory schedule since last year. Mr. Giblin said they don’t have the staff to do that. It was done quarterly by Community & Human Services. They hope it can be done quarterly or twice a year. We can tap into the Apartment Association or Real Estate Services. Ms. Waller asked if there’s any way they can get an update on housing, how many units we’re looking for, what’s our shortfall, etc.? We’re an advisory committee and need to know if there’s a big shortage or if we’re caught up on rental units and can concentrate on something else. Mr. Giblin said that’s a separate issue from the quarterly apartment survey. You’re talking about the county’s yearly housing needs assessment. That’s ongoing and is done after the new median incomes are released by HUD for the year. They haven’t come out yet for 2023. We’re going to try to do that at least once a year. Ms. Waller asked how often the apartment assessment is done. Mr. Giblin said annually. It’s incredibly labor intensive. Mr. Buntzman noted that there are no vacancies in Immokalee and rents are going up. Mr. Harney told the AHAC:  This is his last meeting because he’s moving to Sarasota next month. He’s been involved with the AHAC for nearly five years and a member for about 2½ years.  It’s been a pleasure to contribute to the work that needs to be done to promote affordable housing. We’ve gotten a lot done. There are still loose ends and the game isn’t over. We need to make sure all those loose ends get tied up.  Jamie French told him recently that where he lives, the corner of Collier and Vanderbilt Beach Road, is probably going to be the midpoint for population for the county in the future. That’s a hard thing for a lot of people to understand, but there will be a ton of development east of Collier Boulevard, not a few houses, tens of thousands of houses.  A lot of what we’ve talked about here has dealt with the areas west of Collier. It’s important for the AHAC to focus on the direction it’s going. That’s where a lot of affordable housing will go due to land costs. The direction of the county is going to be critical going forward, including Immokalee.  Habitat is involved out there. There are also the new villages that Collier Enterprises is starting, which will include an affordable component of the Rural-Fringe Mixed-Use Area.  These will be coming in the future. They’re critical for the county because when an area is built up, it’s expensive. There’s only so much that can be done here.  Mike has told us several times that you can get in transport-oriented districts and busy street corners and build some buildings. Most of it’s going to come east.  He’s resigning from his Habitat position. Jean is considering taking over part of what he’s doing. She’ll probably be AHAC’s Habitat contact and will do a good job.  It’s critically important for AHAC members to show up at meetings to speak about important issues. It’s one thing to send a letter, it’s another to take the time, write your own words, stand up and speak to the commissioners. That’s very important, probably as important as all the other work that we do. Unless we speak out to the commissioners when they’re making a decision, we’re missing a major part of what we do. He suggests they do that going forward.  He appreciated the opportunity to be a part of this and thanked them for listening. Chairman Hruby thanked him for his service, noting it was a pleasure having him on the AHAC. 34 9. 10. {pril I 8. 2023 [The members and audience applauded.J Action ltem: Make sure AHAC members ottend PC and BCC meetinss to voice their suooort of affordable-housing proi ects. Chairman Hruby noted that they have two positions open. Mr. Harney said his term will end at the end of this year. If you elect someone now, do they have to be reelected again at the end of the term? Mr. Giblin said that person would fill the remaining poftion of your term and then they'd be up for election again. Mr. Harney said you might want to consider whether they want to fill his position for the remaining months. ADJOURN Vice Chair Foron made a motion to odjourn. Second by Mr. Buntzman. The motion passed unanimously, 8-0. NEXT MEETING DATE 8:30 a.m. NIay 3,2023 Conference Room 6091610 Growth Management Community Development Department There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the chairman at 10:30 a.m. These minutes were θ″ (check one) as presented / , or as ADVISORY COPIPIITTEE 2535