Travis County Commissioners Court
September 21, 2004
Housing Finance Corporation
Let's call to order the Travis County housing finance corporation. Item number
21 approve minutes of board of directors meetings of June 22 and July 6, 2004.
>> move approval.
>> second.
>> that's that combination we asked about a few minutes ago.
You don't like this.
>> [inaudible] [laughter]
>> I’m glad we fully understand. All in favor? That passes
by unanimous vote. Number 3 is consider and take appropriate objection the
following: 3-a, invoice for legal services rendered and expenses incurred,
3-b, authorize sending invoices for reimbursable legal fees.
>> good afternoon, harvey Davis, manager for the corporation.
I’m asking approval for a legal invoice from naman, howell, smith and lee.
The amount is $4,182.42. I do represent to the board that I have carefully
reviewed the invoice and that, in my opinion, the fees, the hours and the
work are appropriate and recommend that the board approve the invoice. I also
request approval by the board to send invoices to several parties who we can
ask for reimbursement for the legal fees that we have paid and the list, which
i'll be happy to read out if you want, is in your backup.
>> move approval of a and b.
>> second.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
I was trying to give Commissioner Sonleitner an opportunity to get here to
discuss number 1. I don't know if she had issues with it, but she had not
seen the [inaudible]. 1, consider and take appropriate action on recommended
changes to policy guidelines for receiving and approving applications for
financial participation in residential developments. And there were a couple
of changes you were recommending to us.
>> yes, sir. Three changes. In all cases they represent an
increase in our fees that we charge, which i'll be happy -- I did go over
with the board at the last meeting.
>> can we just briefly review?
>> yes, we can. The first increase is the application fee.
Increase from $11,000 to $12,000. Part of that increase is due to our attorney
has increased his fee in the initial application with the Texas bond review
board from $1,000 to $1,500. This change would also require the applicant
to pay directly the attorney instead of having us pay them and then forward
the money on to him. The second recommendation is to require that the annual
fee -- the first year of the annual fee be paid at bond closing and then the
annual fee would be payable in monthly installments beginning on the anniversary
day of the bond closing and the rationale for this change is to increase the
-- accelerate the payment of the annual fee because we've had some difficulty
in the collection of the annual fee. And then the third recommended change
is to add a compliance fee that would be $10 per residential unit for Texas
credit properties and $25 per residential unit for non-tax credit properties.
Tax credit properties are those in which they receive -- we issue the bonds
for the apartment complex and they also get tax credits from the Texas department
of housing and community affairs. The per-unit fee is lower because tdhca
provides additional oversight which would reduce our obligation in compliance
oversight. And this would replace the practice that we have now of charging
for the compliance fee based on an hourly rate. So those are the three changes
that we are recommending. I do also want to tell the board that I have carefully
gone over these changes with our attorney and that I’m comfortable in saying
that he feels that these are in line with what other issuers are charging.
>> what's the justification for number 3? Recommendation
number 3?
>> well, the justification is that what other [inaudible]
are charging in this manner and also that it would provide for resources for
the corporation in doing the compliance audits.
>> as long as the occupancy rate the high.
>> yes.
>> is what now? As long as -- occupancy per unit?
>> yes. Per unit.
>> per residential unit.
>> yes. Whether they are occupied or not. I mean you would
have to -- if you had low occupancy, you might not be able to pay the fee,
that would be the only problem.
>> you would think that it was only collected if it were
occupied.
>> that would make a lot more sense than paying for vacant
units. [indiscernible] you think -- [inaudible] answer that in private.
>> no, you can ask me this in public. I think the hourly
-- well, this fee provides -- would provide more fee income for the corporation,
and this is the -- many issuers charge a compliance fee, so this would be
what other people are doing and in cases like tdhca, they charge $25 a unit,
you know, across the board as compliance fee.
>> and it's a better approach, you think?
>> yes.
>> it is more sound public policy.
>> yes.
>> and we can [indiscernible].
>> that's right.
>> that's why I move approval of all three.
>> second.
>> any more discussion? All three changes in one. All in
favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> move adjourn.
>> second.
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified: Thursday, October 27, 2005 9:39 AM