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