Loading...
2021-08-27 SKHHP PacketATTACHMENT A SKHHP Executive Board August 27, 2021, 1:00 - 3:00 PM Virtual - Zoom Meeting Video conference: https:Hzoom.us/j/99857398028?pwd—eXFiMmJpQmlabDZmMmRQbIINOYS8 d OR by phone: 253-215-8782 Meeting ID: 998 5739 8028 Password: 085570 I. Call to Order a. Roll Call b. Introductions II. Review Agenda/Agenda Modifications III. Approval of July 23, 2021 Minutes — ATTACHMENT A (action item) IV. Education Item (1:00 — 2:00) a. Tim Thomas, Research Director, Urban Displacement Project South King County evictions, BIPOC displacement (past and present), and recent work on Housing Precarity Risk Model. V. Old Business a. SKHHP Housing Capital Fund with Cedar River Group (2:00 — 2:45) i. Timeline — ATTACHMENT B ii. Matrix — ATTACHMENT C Discussion will focus on: • Highlighted rows: eligible applicants, eligible activities, non -eligible activities, type of funding awards, and application content • Last column: staff work group recommendations iii. Evaluation Criteria (for introductory purposes only) —ATTACHMENT D VI. New Business a. 2021 Quarter 2 Progress Report - ATTACHMENT E (2:45 — 2:55) VII. Updates/Announcements Vill. Next Meeting — September 24, 2021 — 1:00 pm — 3:00 pm IX. Adjourn ATTACH M ENT A SKEE: I. CALL TO ORDER Nancy Backus called the virtual meeting to order at 1:02 PM. a. ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM SKHHP Executive Meeting July 23, 2021 MINUTES Executive Board members present: Nancy Backus, City of Auburn; Dana Ralph, City of Kent; Brian Wilson, City of Burien; Joseph Cimaomo, City of Covington; Traci Buxton, City of Des Moines; Brian Davis, City of Federal Way; Sunaree Marshall, King County; Sue -Ann Hohimer, City of Normandy Park; Ryan Mclrvin, City of Renton; Tom McLeod, City of Tukwila Other attendees: Angela San Filippo, SKHHP; Trish Abbate, SKHHP; Colleen Brandt -Schluter, City of Burien; Mark Santos -Johnson, City of Renton; John Howell, Cedar River Group; Hannah Bahnmiller, City of Renton; Marty Kooistra, Housing Development Consortium; Alanna Peterson, Pacifica Law Group; Nicole Nordholm, City of Des Moines; Merina Hanson, City of Kent; McCaela Daffern, King County; Sarah Bridgeford, City of Federal Way; Amy Arrington, City of Normandy Park II. REVIEW AGENDA/AGENDA MODIFICATIONS Angela San Filippo added to new business discussing if/when to return to in person meetings. III. APPROVAL OF JUNE 25, 2021 MINUTES Traci Buxton moved to approve the June 25, 2021 minutes as presented; Ryan Mclrvin seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously (10-0). IV. OLD BUSINESS a. SKHHP Housing Capital Fund update John Howell provided a brief progress update: 1) After meeting with ARCH staff, we learned that ARCH participates in the public funders group and as opposed to creating their own application, uses the common application, which all the other public funders use. ARCH shared that they work with loans more than grants because loans recirculate the capital funds and also because tax credits can only be used against debt so grant funded projects are less valuable to developers. Grants are used for smaller projects that can't sustain debt or have a social service component. In terms of community support, they do not ask for a formal letter of support but instead have lengthy conversation with city staff about projects to understand the level of support and concern. In terms of schedule, ARCH's process is a one-year process and while there are activities all year long, Q4 is high intensity for staff and board. Advisory Board plays significant role in evaluation and recommendations. 2) Work continues on roles within decision making process and schedule. 3) Work continues on evaluation criteria along with an added equity component. b. SKHHP Foundation i. 501(c)(3) bylaws ii. 501(c)(3) articles of incorporation iii. Initial SKHHP Foundation Board of Directors Page 2 of 19 ATTACH M ENT A San Filippo reviewed the board composition of 3-7 members, with up to three Foundation Board members from SKHHP staff or Executive Board members, and remaining Foundation Board members must be "representatives of community -based or nonprofit organization related to affordable housing development, the provision of homelessness services, or housing related advocacy in South King County". Foundation Board members serve for two years and up to three consecutive terms The Foundation Board will coordinate with the SKHHP Executive Board to decide whether and when to apply for private grant funding. All grant funds received by the Foundation will be deposited into the SKHHP Housing Capital Funds Account, to be disbursed as decided through SKHHP's overarching funding process. San Filippo reviewed the decision -making process, highlighting the role and position of the Foundation Board to review Advisory Board recommendations within 30 days of receipt to ensure the recommendations further the charitable purposes of the Foundation and are consistent with the requirements, restrictions, or conditions applicable to the grant funds. San Filippo provided an overview of the revisions which include:- Clarification regarding the City of Auburn's role as the administering agency for SKHHP - Purpose statement to include supportive services by stating: those charitable purposes include preserving, producing, and promoting affordable housing in South King County, including through providing housing paired with on -site or off -site comprehensive support services to low-income residents and individuals experiencing or who have experienced homelessness The staff work group provided a recommendation for the initial Foundation Board to include the SKHHP Executive Manager, an Executive Board representative from a small SKHHP partner city and an Executive Board representative from a large SKHHP partner city. Alanna Peterson clarified that future appointments of additional Foundation Board members would originate from the initial Foundation Board itself vs. the Executive Board. San Filippo asked for volunteers to serve on the Foundation Board. Discussion occurred around expectations, time commitment and experience needed. Brian Davis and Joseph Cimaomo volunteered. Hohimer moved to appoint Angela San Filippo, SKHHP Executive Manager; Brian Davis, City of Federal Way City Manager; Joseph Cimaomo, City of Covington Councilmember; Dana Ralph seconded the motion. Motion passes unanimously (10-0). Buxton moved to approve the 501 c3 bylaws; seconded by Tom McLeod. Motion passes unanimously (10-0). Buxton moved to approve the 501 c3 articles of incorporation; seconded by Ryan Mclrvin. Motion passes unanimously (10-0). c. 2022 Work plan and budget i. 2022 Budget scenario memo Resolution 2021-03: 2022 work plan and budget San Filippo provided additional details about the budget scenarios including a breakdown of the population tiers and related contribution levels. As a review, the budget priorities for 2022 include a balanced budget that includes two full time positions and develops a compensation structure for Advisory Board members. Discussion occurred around concerns about long term council approval of future budgets along with questions around virtual vs. in person Advisory Board meeting participation and how that could factor into compensation considerations. Page 3 of 19 ATTACHMENT A Mclrvin moved to approve Resolution 2021-03: 2022 work plan and budget, Option 1 with a stipulation that Advisory Board compensation allocation specifics will be determined at a later date. Motion seconded by Buxton. Resolution passed (9-1, Cimaomo opposed). V. NEW BUSINESS August meeting will be held virtually. VI. UPDATES/ANNOUNCEMENTS Kelly Rider will cover for Sunaree Marshall while she is on maternity leave. VII. NEXT MEETING —August 27, 2021 — 1-3pm Vill. ADJOURN Backus adjourned the meeting at 3:07pm. Page 4 of 19 ATTACHMENT B SKKHP Capital Fund Timeline Version 3 August 11, 2021 Applicant Provide intent to apply statements SKHHP Confirm available Confirm total Meet with Meet with Meet with Staff funds from cities other revenues potential potential potential Issue NOFA applicants applicants applicants SKHHP Advisory Board SKHHP 501(c)(3) board SKHHP Executive Board Coordination Funders among funders Group group members is year-round Member Cities Review draft and Receive report on recommend Informed about available funds funding applicants that guidelines and intend to apply priorities Informed about applicants that intend to apply Informed about applicants that Receive report on intend to apply available funds Set guidelines & priorities Coordination Coordination among funders among funders group members group members is year-round is year-round Pre -application Conversations materials and Applications due with SKHHP staff meeting Coordinate pre - application with Conversations Receive Meet with cities County with developers applications Informed about pre -applications Informed about pre -applications Informed about pre -applications Combined Application released Informed about pre -applications (for cities where projects located) Notified about Receive & begin Meetings to make applicants reviewing draft applications recommendations [Late] Review Notified about draft applicants recommendations for alignment Notified about applicants & any service needs Notified about applicants Meeting about project funding decisions among funders Meet with SKHHP staff [Late Dec] Notified of outcome Announce final recommendations on project funding Funding decisions announced by members of Funders Group Announce final funding allocations (after City actions) Contributing city councils approve projects Page 5 of 19 ATTACHMENT C DRAFT SKHHP Capital Fund Structure, Policies and Guidelines August 11, 2021 August 27, 2021 SKHHP Executive Board meeting discussion will focus on the following areas of the matrix: • Highlighted rows: Eligible applicants, eligible activities, non -eligible activities, types of funding awards, and application content • Last column: staff work group recommendations and comments Stage ILA Guidance ARCH Process/Approach S01c3 Requirements Previous Board Discussion or Member Comments Staff Work Group Recommendations and Comments Application N/A Competitive application process at There will be some • Not more than once per • Initially structure the capital fund to have one Process— least once per year, in coordination complexity in getting year initially. Wait until funding round per year. That is consistent with Frequency and with Commerce, County and WSHFC. two rounds of review capital fund builds before most other funders. timing? ARCH may elect to accept and approval from the having more than one • In future years, as experience with the fund grows, applications "out of cycle" for two boards. Not a legal funding round. leave open the possibility that an additional round preservation projects or opportunity issue; an administrative of funding could be considered — particularly to acquisitions. issue. An agreement respond to emerging opportunities. Applications available online. Staff could spell out • Sync up timing of SKHHP application process with participates in a statewide work circumstances when Funders Group. group each year to update the there could be off -cycle • Include both a Letter of Intent and Pre -Application application forms based on evolving review and approval for Process funder priorities. emerging opportunities. • See attached timeline for process schedule Funding 1.d. affordable housing Use of Trust Fund to meet long term The 501c3 will have to • There should be flexibility in • Make sure SKHHP priorities are consistent with Priorities and projects and programs targets spend $ that is how funds are used restrictions and requirements of other funding Targets 5.d. (4) Executive Board Population Target consistent with a . Base use of funds on most sources that are likely to be used by developers. will have the power to Family 56% "charitable purpose". pressing needs, and • The priorities and targets should be based, in part, establish policies for the Senior 19% Must be consistent with consider where there are on a gap analysis. That analysis should be revisited expenditure of SKHHP Homeless 13% language in c3 bylaws gaps every couple of years to make sure that SKHHP budgeted items Special Needs 12% about purpose. Purpose • Use to create and foster priorities are meeting current needs. is broad. relationships with funders, Comments Housing that meets the needs of low- There is no definition builders, cities • The Advisory Board and Executive Board will need income households earning up to under tax code or what • It must be based on to have discussions about target income levels. 50% of median income. In special "low-income" means. outcomes — units created or circumstances (for example, to preserved (several mentions promote affordable homeownership of preservation) or to leverage another program's • Serve as bridge funds — may funding such as 4% Low Income be "last money in" Housing Tax Credits), moderate - Page 6 of 19 ATTACHMENT C Stage ILA Guidance ARCH Process/Approach S01c3 Requirements Previous Board Discussion or Staff Work Group Recommendations and Comments Member Comments income households earning up to • Pick one focus area and add 80% of median income may also be more as organization assisted. grows. Narrow the focus initially. Don't have strong Funding Priorities: Achieve targets feelings about what the for populations; leverage private focus should be. investment; TOD; homeless shelter and housing capacity; preservation of existing stock; geographic equity; cost-effective development approaches Eligible N/A Housing developers or sponsors that No inherent problem • The list of ARCH eligible applicants is appropriate. Applicants are: with giving $ to private Comments • Non-profit organizations developer, as long as • Good to include Housing Authorities — opportunity • Private for -profit organizations purpose for which $ is to partner with KCHA on preservation. • Public housing authorities given is consistent with • The engagement with for -profit developers will • Public development authorities charitable purposes of depend on what the capital funds will be used for; • Units of local government 5016. Since there is no what the SKHHP priorities are. Partnerships involving combinations legal standard, one • Leave local governments on the list for now and of the above groups are encouraged, approach could be to clarify when funding priorities are established. especially in the case where a private create parameters for -profit organization applies for around the type of funding. activities or projects SKHHP will fund. Eligible Funds may be used for the following No concerns about the • Begin with capital only. Pick • The list of ARCH eligible activities is appropriate, Activities activities: ARCH list (as long as focus areas. In long run with some modifications. • Acquisition and related costs, consistent with include more eligible Comments such as appraisals, financing charitable purposes of activities. Need to get a • Define moderate income as households up to 80% costs, and transaction costs 501c3) tangible project going AMI. • Predevelopment, including • For mixed income projects, funding for residential architectural and engineering units must be consistent with SKHHP funding design, permits and fees priorities. • Rehabilitation and new • Should not include short-term direct tenant construction costs assistance or operating expenses as eligible. Page 7 of 19 ATTACHMENT C Stage ILA Guidance ARCH Process/Approach 501c3 Requirements Previous Board Discussion or Member Comments Staff Work Group Recommendations and Comments • Site development SKHHP capital fund will not be large enough initially • Off -site development only when to support operating expenses. necessary to assure utility service to the project site • Short term direct tenant assistance programs aimed at homeless prevention, e.g., rent "buy -downs" or loan programs for payment of security deposits and last -month rent deposits. • Mixed -income projects so long as HTF dollars assist only low- and moderate -income units In limited cases, ARCH may award a portion of their funds to support early technical assistance to priority projects. Non -Eligible N/A Funds may not be used for: No concerns about the • Keep it simple. Need to • The list of ARCH non -eligible activities is Activities • The development of any non- ARCH list. learn from experience. appropriate. residential use. HTF funds may Could possibly support Comments be used in a mixed use operating expenses for • Clarify that restriction on site development and off - development only for that non -profits providing site development refers to non-residential uses. portion of the development that services, but likely not is specific to the residential use. for for -profits. There is This restriction also applies to site more flexibility in development and off -site supporting non -profits. development costs. Will need to make sure • The cost of any program language about lobbying operating expenses is consistent with legal • The cost of any political or restrictions. lobbying activities or materials. • Rehabilitation of single family units in a manner that would Page 8 of 19 ATTACHMENT C Stage ILA Guidance ARCH Process/Approach S01c3 Requirements Previous Board Discussion or Staff Work Group Recommendations and Comments Member Comments duplicate a city's Home Repair Assistance and King County's Home Repair Programs • Uses that are Public Capital Facilities such as correctional facilities or inpatient treatment facilities Types of Loans and grants. Housing Trust Both loans and grants • Begin with grants and then • Offer the opportunity for both loans and grants in Funding Fund dollars will be made available as are potential uses; can work into loans order to create robust flexibility. Awards either secured grants or loans. also buy/sell property. Comments Flexible terms offered to • Loans are more common practice for developers accommodate a range of projects. accessing tax credits. Applicants indicate in application • Utilize grants for smaller projects or projects with whether they are applying for a grant community service components. or loan, and what loan terms are proposed for the project. Application Would like to have a • SKHHP staff should participate in the Public Content statement that funds will Funders Group. It will help coordinate decisions by not be used for lobbying the various public funders (check box) • SKHHP should use the existing Combined Funders Application (CFA). • Include letter of consistency from the jurisdiction where the project will be located affirming the project is consistent with the Consolidated Plan, local comprehensive plan and its housing element, and any local housing action plans. Comments • Leave open the possibility that SKHHP may add supplemental questions if the CFA does not provide all information needed. Evaluation N/A General Create criteria that is the • Capital funds should be used • See attached draft evaluation criteria. Criteria 1. Feasibility and Cost Effectiveness same for both the public where projects are • Do not use criteria for scoring purposes. Use it as a 2. Relevance to Local Housing Need and private funds. If proposed and ready, as guide for conversation about each application. there are disagreements opposed to being based on Comments Page 9 of 19 ATTACHMENT C Stage ILA Guidance ARCH Process/Approach S01c3 Requirements Previous Board Discussion or Member Comments Staff Work Group Recommendations and Comments 3. Experience of Sponsor and about funding decisions, contributions to the capital • Need to be explicit about the need for SKHHP to Development Team, Adequacy of it will be easier to fund. partner with other funders, developers, Management Plan, Duration of resolve if everyone uses • The SKHHP capital fund jurisdictions. Affordability, Adequacy of same criteria. should be structured to • Need to make sure that SKHHP goals and values Support Services, Firmness of No legal requirement; support the "best value" are reflected in the criteria. Financial Commitments the suggestion is for projects for meeting priority • Need to build equity into criteria — perhaps as a ease of administration. affordable housing needs in new stand alone criteria and as part of the other Specific South County, regardless of criteria. a. Development and Operating location Budgets • Initially focus on "best bang b. Project Readiness for the buck," but overtime c. Development Team Track Record spread capital fund dollars d. Property and Asset Management equitably across the region Capacity and work to ensure equity in e. Displacement and Relocations benefits as well (to ensure f. Criteria for Out of Cycle affordable housing is being Proposals distributed across the region) • Periodically board and staff should examine where projects are not being proposed and the reasons for the lack of proposals • Decisions about where to use capital fund dollars are likely to be heavily influenced by project readiness and availability of other housing funds, so should remain flexible • Start with initial criteria and add if necessary. Potential displacement and relocation is very Page 10 of 19 ATTACHMENT C Stage ILA Guidance ARCH Process/Approach S01c3 Requirements Previous Board Discussion or Member Comments Staff Work Group Recommendations and Comments important. Want to avoid displacement. Could become a challenge with TOD. Decision 4.b. Executive Board Funding decisions with We will want to understand • 501c3 board should review private funds Makers provides recommendations respect to philanthropic parameters that applications - only for compliance with to the Parties regarding $ will need to be philanthropists put on mission/purpose and intent of funders. the allocation of public and approved by both the funding. • 501c3 board should make decisions about which private funding Exec Board and 501c3 private funds/grants to pursue, in consultation with 14.f.(i) Each Party choosing funds. Will need to the Executive Board. to participate in funding a confirm desired timing • Executive Board should be final decision maker for project or program and coordination here both private and public funds. through the Housing (for example, how much Capital Funds Account will time should be built in by action of its legislative for Exec Board review body authorize the and approval, and when application of a specified Advisory Board review amount of its Individual and recommendation Account monies to such process should be project or program, and factored in). will authorize and direct the SKHHP Executive There will be some Board, the SKHHP Program overlap between the Manager, and the two boards, but the Administering Agency to 501c3 board will be take such actions as different than Exec necessary to accomplish board. After non-profit is this. formed, there could be a The Executive Board will separate agreement recommend to the between 501c3 and individual legislative bodies Executive board to spell various terms to out details. Keep the accompany their incorporation authorizations, including documents at a high amount allocated, project level. Page 11 of 19 ATTACHMENT C Stage ILA Guidance ARCH Process/Approach S01c3 Requirements Previous Board Discussion or Staff Work Group Recommendations and Comments Member Comments description, affordability requirements, type and term of funding commitment, and security interests. Role of the 8. Advisory Board will Advisory Board does not set priorities Decisions about role of • Should it be voluntary? • Recommend annual funding guidelines and Advisory provide advice and or make decisions; they advise on the Advisory Board and Paid? Role? Role for priorities to Executive Board Board recommendation to the recommendations, including funding relationship to work of Advisory Board in making • Review applications and make recommendations Executive Board on land conditions. AB discussed the the Exec Board/501c3 recommendations about for both private and public funds. and/or money resource applications and prepares summary Board in the funding capital funding. allocation for affordable matrices that outline the public approval process should housing projects, input on benefits of the projects, and other be considered in policy needs related to basic information. determining overall housing stability, program The AB finalizes recommendations timing of funding design and development, and associated funding conditions approval process. recommendations for and presents recommendations to emergency shelter and the ARCH Exec Board, with help from other immediate staff to prepare presentation affordable housing needs... materials. Contract 4.c. Exec Board directs If there are concerns • Utilize the ARCH contract template as starting Documents Administering Agency to about the administrative point. enter into agreements with burden of SKHHP • ILA requires project approval from any city that third parties for the use needing approval from contributed to that project. and application of public all member Councils, • To the extent SKHHP contracts with for -profits, will and private funds. could consider having need to make sure agreements are clear regarding 4.d.(v) SKHHP staff develop contracts be with 501c3 terms, including: affordability requirements, standard regulatory instead (would not expected engagement with communities, etc. agreements acceptable to require member Council Comments private and public financial approval). • Will do contracting with in-house staff, but will institutions to facilitate the need to contract out some portions of contract availability of funding for review and analysis private and public projects containing affordable housing. Page 12 of 19 ATTACHMENT C Stage ILA Guidance ARCH Process/Approach 501c3 Requirements Previous Board Discussion or Staff Work Group Recommendations and Comments Member Comments 14.f. The Executive Board will develop standard forms of approvals and agreements to be used in the application of funds contributed to the Housing Capital Funds Account (collectively referred to as "project financing documents") Reporting 4.c. At least annually, • Annual reports are fine. • Annual reporting is adequate. Don't want reporting Requirements report to the Parties on the cycle to be onerous for staff. geographic distribution of • Make reporting metrics consistent with County all housing capital funds affordable housing dashboard. 14.c. The Administering • Initial list of metrics suggested: Agency will maintain ➢ Location of funds used and list of projects records to separately track funded the deposits, withdrawals ➢ Type of housing (population served and income and interest earnings, levels) within each Individual ➢ Number of income restricted units created Account and each project ➢ Amount of other funds leveraged Account, and provide ➢ Number of applications received quarterly reports to all ➢ Brief description of amount and type of work Parties as to the status of needed to support projects funds in each Individual Account and Project Account. These responsibilities may be delegated to the SKHHP Program Manager Project 4.d.(viii) Develop and carry Staff provide compliance monitoring If Board would like the • Will do monitoring and compliance with in-house Monitoring out procedures for for all member cities for projects 501c3 involved in project staff. Presumption is that most SKHHP funded and monitoring of affordable funded via the capital fund and monitoring and projects will also be County and/or state -funded Compliance units and to administer through local inclusionary zoning compliance, we'll need direct service housing projects and/or development to build that into bylaws Page 13 of 19 ATTACHMENT C Stage ILA Guidance ARCH Process/Approach S01c3 Requirements Previous Board Discussion or Member Comments Staff Work Group Recommendations and Comments programs on behalf of any agreements. Compliance is required and/or separate and will be monitored for income and affordability Party. Such direct service on both rental and home ownership agreement with SKHHP. requirements. housing programs may units. • Will need to monitor the resources needed to do include but are not limited this work over time. to relocation assistance Comments programs, rent voucher • In initial years ARCH did this work in-house. In and/or deposit loan later years as portfolio grew larger, they had to programs. increase staff capacity to monitor compliance. • Outstanding question whether SKHHP member cities want SKHHP staff to monitor compliance of projects/units created by local zoning incentives and/or requirements. Should study the need for that activity and staff capacity. Sources of (14) Contributions from Member contributions of cash and As noted above, will • There is some interest in • Amount of SKHHP funds will not be sufficient to Funding parties or (4.d.(xi)) public land. Projects rely heavily on other need to confirm whether having every city contribute fully fund projects. SKHHP funds will likely be part and private fundraising funds. For every $1 in local 501c3 will be handling to the capital fund over of a package of public and/or private funds. efforts of public and contributions to HTF $10 has been private funds only or time (either funding or • Contributions of both land and money should be private entities (including contributed to ARCH projects. Have both public and private land) although there is considered contributions to the capital fund. non-profit corporations) to not historically raised philanthropic funds. recognition that this may be . Next phase of consultant work will be to reach out raise funds to carry out the funds. challenging for some to potential philanthropic funders to explore level purposes of this smaller communities (and of interest. Agreement. it's important to be inclusive). Page 14 of 19 ATTACHMENT D SKHHP CAPITAL FUND EVALUATION CRITERIA General Evaluation of applications will focus on the following key areas: (1) Feasibility and cost effectiveness (i.e., Trust Fund award per unit/SF, total development cost per unit/SF, reasonableness of budgets and proforma, adequacy of resources and ongoing sustainability, and site control). (2) Relevance of the project to local housing needs, including the extent to which the project is consistent with the local plans (e.g., Consolidated Plan, Housing Element, or area plans), and the extent to which housing need will be met and help to achieve SKHHP's stated priorities. (3) Suitability of the project sponsor and development team, including any track record and/or structures for success, adequacy of management plans, duration of affordability, ongoing sustainability, adequacy of support services, and firmness of financial commitments or likelihood of receiving those commitments. (4) Advancing the goals of equity, including the extent that projects are community -driven and/or reduce or undo disproportionate harm to communities most impacted by historic injustice and displacement, including extremely low-income households with incomes at or below 30 percent of area median income and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities Specific The following specific information areas will be evaluated for data to support the key focus areas described above. A. Development and Operating Budgets Projects will be evaluated for cost effectiveness on a per unit and per square foot basis. Higher up -front development costs may be justified to create long-term operational efficiencies (e.g., through use of high -efficiency building systems), provided that those increased costs have a relatively short payback period. SKHHP may use third parry reviewers to evaluate estimated construction costs. Development and operating budget forms should provide detailed explanation to support estimated expenses. If support services are identified as an integral part of the project, a detailed services budget must also be submitted. Proposed financing will be evaluated for feasibility based on expressed interest from lenders and investors, and applicant (or applicant team, including more -experienced consultants and partners) should have experience in obtaining financing, and other competitive criteria (e.g., estimated tax credit score if LIHTC equity is proposed). B. Project Readiness Projects will be evaluated for their readiness to proceed. Applicants should demonstrate full site control, and have initiated the intake process with the local permitting authority. Applicants should have a "letter of consistency" from the jurisdiction where the project will be located affirming the project is consistent with the Consolidated Plan, local comprehensive plan and its housing element, and any local housing action plans. Projects that propose significant fundraising should demonstrate steps taken to prepare for and implement a capital campaign plan. Projects that will rely on public funding to cover the costs of ongoing operations or services Page 15 of 19 ATTACHMENT D should identify and describe the availability of such funding, and report on the project's competitiveness for such funds based on discussions with likely fenders. C. Development Team Track Record Project review will take into consideration how well experienced development teams have performed on previously funded projects and, in the interest in increasing the diversity of housing and community developers, how less experienced developers (or partners/consultants on their team) demonstrate an understanding of the steps and structures needed for success. When there is an applicable track record (for the applicant or partner/consultants), the application should identify lessons learned from those projects and describe how performance/actions have been modified as a result. D. Property and Asset Management Capacity The proposed property and asset management entities will be evaluated on their experience, performance, or developing capacity in managing comparable developments. Successful asset managers will have a detailed understanding of the physical and financial condition of their properties, regularly updated capital needs assessments, and thoughtful policies for balancing the objective of maintaining affordable rents and planning for healthy reserves and operating income to cover current and future expenses. If a project is in its preliminary stages, a boiler plate management plan may be submitted with the application. A final management plan will be required prior to contracting. A successful management plan will include the following information: (i) Occupancy: Information in the occupancy management plan must include lease information (length, tenant eligibility and selection standards, standards for termination of lease, eviction, lease renewal) and marketing strategies including local outreach. (ii) Facility: The facility management plan should include provisions for both routine and long-term building maintenance. (iii) Supportive Services: If applicable, the applicant must describe how any supportive services identified as an integral part of the project will be provided, either directly or through linkages with an existing network of service agencies and describe how those services will be in accordance with best practices for the intended population. E. Displacement and Relocation Any activity which would result in the displacement of existing residents, especially low- and/or moderate -income residents and/or BIPOC residents is discouraged. If displacement may occur, the applicant must submit, as part of the application for capital funds, a plan for providing relocation assistance to the displaced residents. If relocation may occur, the applicant is strongly encouraged to contact the King County Housing Finance Program's Relocation Officer at (206) 263-9105 immediately to discuss project details and determine the relocation plan and process appropriate for your project and funding needs. Relocation costs should be included in the Page 16 of 19 ATTACHMENT D project budget. Projects funded with federal dollars (e.g., CDBG funds) must meet all applicable federal relocation requirements. F. S012ortinng Equity The proposed project will be evaluated based on whether the development will advance the goals of equity, including preserving existing communities at risk of displacement (including manufactured housing communities); increasing opportunities for extremely low-income households (households with incomes at or below 30 percent of area median income); creating meaningful project partnerships (including with BIPOC-lead organizations) that give voice and ownership to residents and communities of color; affirmatively marketing new housing opportunities to communities less likely to access opportunities in South King County; providing affordable housing as a public investment — and potential catalyst — in areas that have traditionally received less services and/or public investments; and addressing historic inequities in access to homeownership. G. Nature of location As part of the decision process, reviewers will want to understand how the proposed development fits into the neighborhood and would help further any number of public policy goals. Examples of furthering public policy goals could include: - Locating in a "high opportunity" location, with proximity to or easy access to jobs, grocery stores, pharmacies, schools/childcare, transportation, and community or cultural centers; - Providing affordable housing in areas at high -risk of displacement or experiencing a loss of naturally occurring affordable housing; and - Investing public dollars in areas traditionally/historically underserved or as a catalyst for further investments and development. Page 17 of 19 ATTACHMENT E SOUTH KING HOUSING AND SKENINPHOMELESSNESS PARTNERS 2021 Second Quarter Progress Report WHO WE ARE Partnership formed by an interlocal agreement between 10 jurisdictions in South King County supporting collaboration and sharing of resources to effectively address housing and homelessness in the region. PURPOSE Increase the available options for South King County residents to access affordable housing and to preserve the existing housing stock. CONTACT Website: http://skhhp.org Phone: (253) 329-7394 Email: info(@_skhhp.org The following is a SKHHP progress report for the second quarter of 2021. This quarter included eight SKHHP partner cities adopting the Interlocal Agreement to pool Substitute House Bill 1406 sales tax credit revenue funds, recruitment and outreach for inaugural SKHHP Advisory Board, development of the 2022 work plan and budget, process and planning for SKHHP's Housing Capital Fund, and development of the SKHHP Foundation 501(c)(3) bylaws and articles of incorporation. GOVERNANCE AND ADMINISTRATION • Advisory Board outreach and recruitment • Development of 2022 Work Plan and Budget • Development of SKHHP Foundation 501(c)(3) bylaws and articles of incorporation POLICY AND PLANNING • Eight SKHHP partner cities adopt interlocal agreement to pool Substitute House Bill 1406 sales tax credit revenue funds • Support for South King County City Housing Action Plans • SKHHP Housing Capital Funding process and planning OUTREACH AND EDUCATION Represent SKHHP at local and regional meetings and forums • Housing Interjurisdictional Team (HIJT) for Affordable Housing Committee (AHC) • King County public funders group • Sound Cities Association (SCA) Caucus to the AHC • SKC Forum on Homelessness • SKC Homelessness Advisory Committee (HAC) • SKC Human Service Planners group SKHHP Executive Board educational topics • Eastside Legal Assistance Program and Housing Justice Project — tenant protections and eviction prevention • Washington State Legislative Session review Strengthen regional stakeholders' understanding of housing needs in SKC • Participation in HDC's Affordable Housing Week in the following webinars: o Get to know your regional affordable housing partners with ARCH, HDC, KCHA, SCA, and SKHHP o Housing is Healthcare: Solving Homelessness with Permanent Supportive Housing • Permanent Supportive Housing education webinar with HDC, Catholic Charities Services, and The Corporation for Supportive Housing • Annual update and progress report to non-SKHHP south King County cities Page 18 of 19 ATTACHMENT E South King Housing and Homelessness Partners Fund Status As of June 2021 SKHHP Fund BUDGET OPERATING REVENUES Auburn 26,000 - Burien 15,000 - Covington 7,500 - Des Moines 7,500 - Federal Way 26,000 - Kent 34,000 - Normandy Park 4,000 - Renton 34,000 - Tukwila 7,500 - Unincorporated KC 34,000 - King County additional contribution 41,000 - Contributions/Donations 15,000 - INTEREST EARNINGS 1,600 87 Total 253,100 87 EXPENDITURES BUDGET SKHHP Cost Reimbursement 279,860 Administration Fee 28,000 Total 307,860 Beginning Fund Balance — January 1, 2021 241,645 Estimated Net Change In Fund Balance (54,760) Estimated Ending Fund Balance — December 31, 2021 186,885 SKHHP Cost Reimbursement Detail EXPENDITURES Wages Benefits Supplies Professional Services Interfund Allocations Total ACTUAL ACTUAL 122,421 14,000 136,421 Actual 79,445 28,992 1,434 12,550 122,421 1 Page 19 of 19