Travis County Commissioners Court
May 9, 2006
Housing Finance Corporation
We do need Travis County housing finance corporation. Number one is to consider and take appropriate action on request to review whether to continue participation in the low income housing subdivision fee reimbursement policy.
>> and that the board might consider whether to continue to participate or recommend to the county to perhaps either continue with the policy in a different form or to not have a policy like this. I recently went to a meeting with the Austin home builders association. There were about 14 home builders in attendance, and I went over the policy that we have at this time and asked what they thought as far as this being an incentive for affordable housing. They informed me that, well, it was a very small amount, it wasn't an incentive, however, there were additional fees that the county charges for subdivisions and that when you add all the fees it can run to over a thousand dollars. And that if the county had a policy that reimbursed all the fees, then that would be a substantive incentive for them to provide more affordable housing. And in talking with tnr, they informed me that since this policy was established in 2001, the whole fee structure that tnr charges is much different and that, yes, today this plat fee is pretty much a minor part of the fees a developer has to pay the county whereas in 2001 it was pretty much the big fee that they had to pay. That's my recommendation and insight as far as this issue goes.
>> now, we put this fee in place because a certain developer requested it.
>> that's right.
>> and said his company could do a whole lot of good. And in fact, his company did have several homes that quiewlfide, right? I forget the number.
>> they're on phase 4 of the briar creek development, and they have -- and they have applied for the reimbursements on the first three phases. One, they earned half the fee reimbursement.
>> how many homes was that?
>> I don't recall the number.
>> that's what it boils down to, doesn't it? I agree that if it's not doing any good, why have it in place. The developers were not saying this fee was not good, they're saying a larger one would be better.
>> yes.
>> the reality of it is there's a whole lot of stuff that's happening that's good going on in the unincorporated, which is not the situation that we had three, four years ago when this thing was first brought up, and certainly with sh 130 going in and the efforts by Travis County and others to put in the roads that connect to sh 130, the east metro park that's gone in, now there's a whole lot more going on out there. And so folks were not willing to invest those dollars, and they now are. And I don't see where the market is not being able to respond with a starter home that would fit all the criteria. It seems to me that our 50,000 would do a lot more if it were turned over to, say, habitat for humanity and go buy some lots in Austin colony and go forth and do good work as opposed to this that really -- 150 bucks on a home that's going to cost $85,000, it's just nothing. And people are building out there like crazy, so it's not stopping people from provide it.
>> there's a very small number of -- 10 or 15 in the course of 40 or 50.
>> and the paperwork was ridiculous.
>> I think their problem, the difficulty that the builder has was not that they didn't -- weren't selling the homes to people in the income range, it was their being able to come up with the documentation that we were -- that was required in the policy. And I looked at the meetings in 2001, and believe me, we -- the policy is much easier as far as compliance goes for the developers than what was talked about at that time. We did make an effort to make it as easy as possible for the developer to comply, and that we get proper information so that we knew that --
>> but my point was at the time we did this, it was when nothing was going on there in terms of that product classification. And now you just do any kind of driving out near county line road or out in the manor area, there is so much going on out there that I think it served its purpose. And I’d like to see personally that these dollars get redirected to yet one more attempt, and certainly the habitat proposal we've been looking for the money to try and do that, and this would enable us to do and work on the exact same classification of product in terms of getting more people in homes.
>> what did you have in mind if we terminate it? What effective date did you have in mind if we terminate?
>> well, there is a contract amount for phase 4. And of course, that money has to be ate si side. They do have a plat and they have sent the paperwork to do phase 5, and my recommendation would be to permit that to go through, and after that I would recommend not going forward with the program.
>> director Davis?
>> thank you, judge. I guess my question is I really don't know what the total buildout of that whole subdivision is at this point. I know the -- now we're in section 4. And then we have another section that we're looking forward to getting a completed section 5 in that briar creek subdivision.
>> the original plans was 1,050 homes.
>> right. I don't know exactly where we are in that third build out and how many of those persons would utilize, median family income folks and I’m quite sure anything that we can support and give them as far as a reduction is welcomed and appreciated. So I don't want to close the door on this. And I think it was something that I think has still a useful purpose and I think closing the door on it in my opinion is premature as far as briar creek being the first one that came in, and said listen, we're going to look at the plat reimbursement type of scenario. We went through the whole arena. And, you know, the maximum 40% of the lots would be sold to those particular disadvantaged families, those of 80% of the median family income. Now, that is in my opinion a good gesture. It may not be all the money in the world, and they have utilized it. And again, I have not had any inkling from tnr at this point to let me know when the portion of phase 5 will be submitted and then how many homes are left in the total buildout of this subdivision. I don't have an answer. Do you have an answer for that?
>> I understand the phase 5 is going to be on the court's agenda in the next couple of weeks.
>> all right. And the total subdivision layout of buildout, there was a certain amount of homes. How many of these homes have been constructed --
>> I would only be guessing -- [overlapping speakers].
>> remember, this money, some of it still could be used, and especially if the developer is utilizing the money. And I haven't heard that they have turned their backs on accepting that reimbursement. Have you?
>> no. They want the county to continue the program. That's the information they've given me.
>> three questions, seems to me. One is what phase is already under construction?
>> phase 4.
>> and how many homes there does the developer think may qualify? Because I think that at the least we would have to set aside that amount of money. The other thing is on number 5 --
>> which was -- it was less than $22,000. It was 21,000 something.
>> but if you divide 122into 150,000, that's a lot of homes. It's best to terminate it and let them know as soon as possible. The question is since the program has been in place, how many homes have we given the 150-dollar reimbursement on. The smaller the number, the more convincing the argument that it's not doing as much good as we anticipated, so why not terminate it, put that money into a better use.
>> I had that information, but I didn't bring it down.
>> I understand. Those are three easy questions, though. They require a little research, though. Thank god we have a meeting next Tuesday. Is that too soon?
>> no. That is just fine. I’ll be ready.
>> those three questions come to mind for me. Anything else?
>> judge, along with that -- I don't want to see things die, especially when you're dealing with median family income, trying to get a home out there. And my question is have we in our efforts to look at some of the things that we've dealt with as far as assistance, home buyer assistance loan program -- not loan, but grants or whatever it is, have there also been a part of the process as far as allowing these particular developers and the homeowners -- potential homeowners know that there is a program available when these persons come in and ask for subdivisions and stuff like that? Has that been a part of letting them know that there is such assistance that Travis County is dealing with to help them purchase a home?
>> you're talking about the fee reimbursement program.
>> no. I’m referring to the loan assistance -- loan program that we also have.
>> our down payment assistance?
>> down payment assistance, yes.
>> all the programs.
>> yeah.
>> to my knowledge when they come for the plat part of the process, I don't think that they're being informed of it. However, I have visited the subdivisions, certainly briar creek, taken information to the salespeople at that subdivision and other subdivisions to inform them about the programs that they can utilize for their home buyers. So we do make those kind of efforts.
>> but judge, the intent -- even with this plat reimbursement program was -- the median family income is 80% below. I think this is still a part of that, even the loan assistance program, it's something that we can also look into as far as people coming in here. They submit their subdivision plats and all this kind of good stuff and then don't have the knowledge that, hey, there's a loan assistance program for loans that are available to persons that qualify in those median family income brackets. So it's just something I think that in the spirit of what we're trying to do here, I just think it's something that need to be looked into as far as getting the information to the persons that are selling these homes.
>> you have a little problem between now and next week?
>> yes.
>> what can we do to increase efforts to home buyers about available mortgage assistance or down payment assistance programs? And especially those that are pretty much governed by this corporation.
>> I’ll review with you what we are doing to promote these programs, and --
>> and let the participating lenders know of the corporation's keen interest in them working with some of our low to moderate income families.
>> okay.
>> do you have enough to do between now and next Tuesday?
>> this $150,000 doesn't go to the individuals. It goes to the home builder and that's the reason that you're saying that for an 85 85 to 100, 125,000-dollar home, I guarantee you that's not passed on to the home buyer. It's the home builder.
>> yes.
>> in the beginning it was to provide a little bit of additional incentive to build homes in the 80 to 120,000 range for low to moderate income residences.
>> actually, in 2001 they said that starting prices was in the 70's.
>> sfoort, it was in the 70's.
>> it's not that way today.
>> the problem is the land out there has just shot through the roof in terms of how expensive it is because now those areas that are part of the desired development zone are much more expensive than it was.
>> 's also the reason people want to have six or 10 homes per acre and you have neighbors going crazy over it. Because they know when you're putting eight or 10 properties on an acre of land that it is a 40 and 50-foot wide lot. We look forward to next week's report. Number two, consider and take appropriate action on board of directors meeting of March 15th, 2006.
>> so move.
>> second.
>> all in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
>> move adjourn.
>> 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:
Wednesday, May 10, 2006 1:15 PM