Travis County Commissioners Court
February 20, 2007
Item 37
37 is to consider and take appropriate action on the report of meeting with the housing authority of Travis County and strategic housing finance corporation officials. Concerning developing a comprehensive policy for considering public-private partnerships of multifamily housing developments.
>> judge, I would like to let the court know that the first meeting that we tried to work out meeting with these housing fowks that didn't work out that time, Commissioner Gomez, second time on that particular meeting it worked out for Commissioner Gomez and of course didn't work with me. They went on with the meeting I just want to make that -- knowing that is a part of the record as far as trying to come up with some type of resolution to this particular situation. So I won't go any farther, but however -- go ahead on.
>> [indiscernible]
>> okay. I’m harvey Davis. Manager for the corporation and we did have a meeting consisting of three housing authority officials, Commissioner Gomez and myself. The housing authority indicated to us that they -- they have started a -- a -- or established some sort of a committee to -- to develop their own policies. I think their -- they certainly expressed willingness and desires to -- to better work with the county on what -- on what sort of letting us know what they are doing. But they didn't see the rationale for having a -- a joint committee or developing a policy that would be the same policy for both entities. So it was a nice meeting. I guess that would be a fair conclusion as far as what the county does. Of course it's -- it's up -- up to the court as -- as to whether or not you want to give direction to us to -- to work on some kind of draft policy, we would certainly be happy to do that.
>> judge, can we -- for those that may be watching, sometime ago there was a -- there was
>> [indiscernible] that came before the Commissioners court to look at ways of -- of issuing bonds to deal with a private sector type of multi-family housing, but -- in doing so, the -- the particular construction, the land and everything else, was -- all of is that was going to be taken off the tax roll. So -- so tax roll meaning that the -- that the money that normally goes to the -- to the taxing entities such as i.s.d., aisd, whatever -- school district that was located there, aisd, the county would lose its portion along with the city of Austin, the hospital district and hec. So there was some concern about it because since you take that money off the tax roll and this particular multi-family units to address poor or low income persons, it -- it varies and pulls the question well if this money is going to be taken off the tax roll, it would actually end up serving the same low income persons, what we would get in exchange for kicking this off the tax roll. Of course there was some discussion that were brought up -- about this and -- and trying to see how Travis County could develop some kind of policy working with the strategic housing finance corporation to come up with some kind of policies whereby we can look at this if it comes back and -- in another format or another venture. Paifngly the low income was basically going to get the short end of the stick, as far as the kind of programs that were being offered by the entity, the program within the complex itself. Also the other outreaching things that could address low income persons, so a lot of questions that were brought up at that time, then of course we just thought it was necessary to have a meeting with the two -- two public entities, strategic housing finance corporation, of course, but Travis County housing finance corporation. Should come up with some kind of policy so we do not have this problem to confront us in the future. We want to go in that direction. I really -- I guess to my point when these type of situations come up
>> [indiscernible] for us to bless them. There needs to be a policy on our end. If you are taking money off the tax rolls, that's a pretty severe act in my opinion, so but the bottom line is what -- what do you get in exchange for an entity, a public/private partnership type of situation which this was, public private partnership, and the last case that came before us -- what position that they really put us in as far as taxpayers are concerned, also the low income that we need to oversee. So that's basically where it's at. So the conclusion reached at that meeting I guess was -- the housing authority and strategic plan -- strategic partnerships would go its way and we would go ours and -- and maybe they plan to present us something for consideration at this at some point.
>> they were presenting that we could coordinate and communicate better with each other so we could let each other know what we are doing in the area of housing. They felt that one they had already developed the policy and were moving on it. They also felt like they had a charge as the strategic partner and houseness finance and as a housing authority to move forward to meet the needs of housing in this community. They felt that's what they were doing and of course I think we probably would feel the same way. We were doing what we can do to meet those needs. And but essential the coordination and communication between the entities, you know, could improve a lot more. Than it has been in the past. So -- but they felt that -- that there were simply -- they were simply carrying out the charge and they had done everything, followed all of the rules and laws and there are several hoops they have to go through. They met all of those and so -- so they sure counsel with us, the bond counsel, everything is done under the direction of counsel. Certainly the coordination communication can -- can improve.
>> yeah.
>> I guess there are maybe three directions that -- that you could consider. One is that we could wait until they come up with their policy and we could look at that and see -- see if it would be an appropriate policy for -- for the county to -- or for -- for -- to also if we adopt or to -- to do -- it was a good policy to have a public private partnership, the county could develop its own policy and then if strategic came over for an approval of the project, then it would be a matter of applying the county's policy to their project for consideration of approving their project. I think they have -- they have like on the project that came before the county, they had overcome all of the problems for tax credit, for bond financing. The question is should there be additional criteria that a government entity would want to have to grant property tax exemption for these -- these public private partnerships. I noticed that we have a policy ourselves that -- sometimes our discussion reflects a bit more strict criteria than others.
>> well, right. We don't have a --
>> myself generally if I have -- if I feel pretty good by project, I’m a whole lot more generous when it comes to whether or not I should worry about tax exempt status if I question the project, one objection that I come up with is in addition to the project we are giving up tax revenue, maybe make sense for us to address the issue just for ourselves so we can land on it and know --
>> I think so.
>> that way if somebody approaches me, I can say well the county's position is this. As it is right now, I’m sorting depending on my own reaction to the proposal.
>> the county has never considered a public private partnership on a housing project, so that has never -- we have had people come to the housing finance corporation wanting to do it, but -- but we have never -- it's never gone beyond that because we have -- one reason we don't have a policy and six months ago there was a question of -- of a legal question of whether or not in an attorney general's opinion was asked by state legislature whether these private -- public private partnerships were legal and the attorney general did issue an opinion, maybe three months ago that -- that kind of gave the go ahead to -- to these proposals.
>> yeah.
>> [one moment please for change in captioners]
>> at some point john hilly will tell us we need a legal opinion on what restrictions we can impose, if any, john and cliff blunt. Now, this authority given the strategic partnership has come up a couple of times. And if we look at the facts that surrounded the creation, you get one opinion. If you think that those facts were just for that project, then there were others coming down the road, then your interpretation is likely to be a whole lot broader. And when they've asked me in the past, I have sort of avoided the question by asking what have you got in mind? Which means I’m willing to consider another project. What is it? But I think that we kind of cleared the air, fink we determined for ourselves where we stand on those three issues and then we communicate that to strategic partnership and the housing authority of Travis County and it doesn't really matter to me when we do it, but clearly these questions will surface every time a project comes to us under -- that falls under any one of the three categories.
>> that's the other thing, judges, I think we need to allow ourselves some flexibility to find out what affordable is in this community. And I think as the city becomes more and more -- the cost of living in the city becomes higher and high, we will continue to have the need for real affordable housing, that is, you don't -- no one pays more than 30% of their income to housing. And so that number is a moving -- a little moving number. And so as we continue with the growth and development of this city and county, we'll have to be flexible on what affordable housing mean.
>> I have no problem with it.
>> you know, I guess I’m just going back to the time when -- there have been a lot of these things and even have for-profit organizations and a lot of folks that did have certain amenities tied to providing services to the low income -- that they said they would do. And of course they did carry out those amenities to address the low income needs. But then again there were folk that came up under the chodo scenario and you were taking money off the tax roll, but again what did we get in exchange for this property that was taken off the tax roll? Under even the chodo snare rows. But what we're looking at here is not a chodo, but a situation where you do have for profit tied in with the public sector and having something like that and then you still do not reap the benefits and it's just as bona fide as a chodo, then you would have to ask yourself the question, what do we really get in exchange to address the low -- the low income in this community? So I don't think that in my mind I can't divorce myself from making sure that below income are very well served in such a relationship, otherwise why give them the advantage of taking the property off the tax roll? That doesn't add up to me. But again, it's our policy if we would like to look at things like that, but it may an case by case base as we've done in the past, but I think there needs to be put up to the forefront exactly what we're dealing with from the old chodo situation to what we're looking at here currently with the public-private partnership relationship that Travis County housing authority has never dealt with, not since I’ve been here.
>> has cliff blunt been working on the legal aspects of these issues?
>> not on the policy question. He has done some work on the question about the authorization of the housing finance corporation, what the powers of the Commissioners court is and whether Commissioners court wanted to change their charter, those kind of questions.
>> one thing mr. Blunt will be -- mr. Blunt goes on the clock when we have a specific request. But the question is whether we want to take three to for you weeks and authorize the drafting of a policy of these three specific areas, and when we had a draft language, we can make it as broad or nar row as we -- narrow as we care to. If I was on the board of the housing authority of Travis County, I think I’d want to know what the Commissioners court has in mind. And I don't know that I’d want to be out there putting a project together coming to us not knowing what our response will be because we don't know what the policy is. So I guess I’m inclined to think that we ought to land on the policy for ourselves and we also should communicate that to the strategic partnership board, which is the same as the housing authorit's board, in good faith with the understanding that it will facilitate collaboration between us. Because it look like they plan to be a lot more proactive in generating what they considered to be housing -- affordable housing stock than they have been in the past. Just based on the projects they've had over the past couple of years. Which is a good thing if we still have similar goals in mind. So the goal is not to restrict them, but to empower them and also for us to land at a certain place. So if they ask any of us, we can say here is what the county's position is on this because we've established that.
>> there's definitely a need for affordable housing, whatever affordable is, at a certain time.
>> I agree. Now, the other thing, and I thought of this two or three weeks ago, I am not sure what responsibility the federal law places on the Commissioners court. As we go about our business of appointing the board of the housing authority for Travis County. As we may, we made our appointments, patted them on the back and sort of gotten out of the way, but those boards become self-perpetuating because current board members currently have people they know that may be interested and who may compliment the current board, and that's not bad in and of itself. But in other groups it, has lent to bad decisions and not good bore. This one as far as I know has been real good, though. And we have the esd's in mine. The problem with that is that we expect board members to kind of help solicit new board members. So if we get this work done I guess I would-- I’d like to have somebody, a law clerk or somebody, kind of pull the statutes and try to figure out what responsibility does that law place on Travis County as to the housing authority of Travis County? If you ask me what's the mission of that authority, I can tell you generally, but I don't know that I’ve ever read the mission. And yet I made my appointments as they come due.
>> it's been awhile since we've met with the housing authority. I think we did it once since I’ve been here. It's been awhile.
>> and I have in mind sort of refreshing ourselves on exactly what the purpose of the housing authority, what the law -- what charge they're given. Also what the expectation is of the Travis County Commissioners court, when we make the appointments, and in terms of board composition, what the best practices are, what boards work real well. I don't know if this will take a long time if we set our minds doing it, but we have not done it specifically since I’ve been a member of the court, and that's a long time. Every time the issue surfaces, I am reminded that there are specific things that we could do and that would improve our participation, limited though it may be, but also probably improve the yoafl working -- improve the overall working of the authority. Do we want to think about this between now and next week?
>> sure.
>> maybe put in writing what we think we ought to do? How does that sound? Seven quiet. Does that mean we're moving in the right direction?
>> I think it's an appropriate movement. Give it time. But really I guess since we've been kind of up and down on a case-by-case basis depending on folks coming and what they're requesting, it would be good for us to come up with some policies, so at least be some consistency in what we're trying to do because it is a big deal, Commissioner go Gomez, as you brought about, affordability of housing, but then again, I think it's a bigger deal I think even if we stay consistent with the people that come before us if they're asking the Travis County housing authority to assist when they bring in affordable housing to this community. So especially with the exchange of property tax relief, things of that nature. So I think it's something that we really need to move forward with. I think it's going to take ailtion time to get to where we need to go fntion I think it's a good recommendation, judge.
>> I think bullet two and bullet three capture what we're talking about, Travis County will develop policy and establish quarterly meetings between Travis County... (indiscernible).
>> when you think about it, the group of people are trying to help are the ones in our community that need help most. So we worked together, we increase --
>> are we prepared to form a committee now to establish it, to develop the policy in coordination with hhsc and shfc.
>> I think we will have a didn't idea of what we're doing and give thought to that. And when we thank the board for the project cookies that they gave you, we can say what we're doing and if they want us to develop it, we can do that too. But I think we need to be fairly precise than usual because there are parts of this that cliff blunt ends up doing we'll get a bill for and to me we'll need his help on some of us. It's not the most lawyers and legal fees, but clearly we will need his help on this. Can you wait one more week, mr. Davis?
>> I sure can, yes, sir.
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, February 21, 2007 8:00 AM