HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-12-2024; 2 - Discussion on Affordable Housing Bond-Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Scoring Matrix 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 12, 2024
Action Agenda
Item No. 2
SUBJECT: Discussion on Affordable Housing Bond/Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Scoring
Matrix
DEPARTMENT: Housing
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
2023 Bond/CIP Scorecard Blake Rosser, 919-245-2490
Presentation on Recommendations
PURPOSE: To review and discuss the incorporation of stakeholder feedback from the 2023
Requests for Proposals (RFP) process into the Affordable Housing Bond/Capital Investment Plan
(CIP) Scoring Matrix to create a more transparent, equitable, relevant and effective process going
forward.
BACKGROUND: The Orange County Housing Department received feedback both during and
after the 2023 Affordable Housing Bond/CIP RFP process from applicants, residents on the
Affordable Housing Advisory Board (AHAB), and elected officials. The feedback was varied but
several themes emerged across groups:
• The scorecard was confusing and subjective, with poor definitions at times.
• The scorecard unfairly penalizes repair and rehabilitation projects.
• The scorecard does not sufficiently account for past performance of applicants.
• The scorecard does not sufficiently reward housing for 60% AMI (area median income)
and below.
• The scorecard does not sufficiently target residents with disabilities.
• The scorecard does not correctly value leveraging and repayment to County.
• The scorecard does not sufficiently reward Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing
(NOAH).
To that end, Housing staff drafted proposed changes to the scoring process as outlined below.
Changes are broken down by categories on the current 2023 scorecard:
• General Changes
o Include Affordable Housing Advisory Board in an advisory and support role. Shift
scorecard responsibilities to an interdepartmental work group. Staff scores will be
presented to AHAB for comment before presenting to BOCC.
o Add 10% CIP carve-out for Repair and Rehabilitation, advancing stated Master
Aging strategic priorities and better supporting the existing affordable housing stock
2
(NOAH) on a per-dollar basis. A new scoring matrix will be created for repair and
rehabilitation proposals to be reviewed by the Board at a later date.
• Threshold Requirements: require documentation of alignment with specific Strategic
Goals/Priorities (addition to current requirements is underlined)
o The application is complete with all required attachments and was submitted by the
established deadline.
o The project aligns with local affordable housing goals, strategies, and/or adopted
policies (if yes, specify the goal from the Strategic Plan or Master Aging Plan).
o Funding is for an eligible activity.
• Income Targeting and Special Needs: give greater priority to projects serving 60% AMI
and below, which will indirectly support Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH);
and add an explanation for how the project serves special needs populations.
o What income range(s) and population(s) will the proposed project serve?
Income Level Current Score Proposed Score
61%-80% AMI 10 10
31%-60% AMI 15 25
30% AMI or below 25 35
o Does the project target people with special housing needs? If so, how?
Response Current Score Proposed Score
Yes 20 20
No 0 0
The US Department of Housing and Urban Development defines people with special
housing needs as disabled, elderly, veterans, experiencing homelessness,
experiencing interpersonal violence, and holders of Section 8 or other vouchers.
Staff determined it was not advisable to separate the population of people with
disabilities for special consideration, as it could potentially violate Fair Housing
standards, where people with disabilities are categorized alongside both elderly
populations and families for legal protection.
• Residency: delete due to difficulty screening and monitoring.
Res onse Current Score I Proposed Score
Yes 15 10
3
• Leveraging: Prioritize projects than can repay bond funding, and reduce the number of
leveraging tiers from 6 to 4.
Tiers Current Score New Tiers Proposed
Score
81%-100% 0 75%-100% 0
60%-80% 3 50%-75% 5
40%-59% 6 25%-50% 10
20%-39% 9 25% or less 20
10%-19% 15
Less than 10% 20
o Project repays bond funding (Principal-Only): Increase from 3 to 10 points.
Res onse Current Score I Proposed Score
Yes 3 110
o Project repays bond funding (Principal + Interest): Increase from 10 to 20 points.
Res onse Current Score I Proposed Score
Yes 110 120
In total, the leveraging category increases from 33 to 50 points.
• Building and Site Design: Reduce points for accessibility, which is required for all new
construction and rehabilitation.
Res onse Current Score Proposed Score
Yes 20 115
• Community Design: Better define terms, make points either/or to remove subjectivity.
Definitions Current Score Proposed Score
Contributes to a mix of housing within Up to 3 3
existing neighborhood (no change to
defintion
Eliminate bonus points for aesthetic Up to 3 0
appearance.
Define accessibility to needed goods and Up to 4 4
services as one 1 mile
Define access to public transportation as Up to 5 5
'/2 mile
Define traditionally underserved as Up to 3 3
unincorporated Orange Count
In total, the community design category decreases from 18 to 15 points.
4
• Community Support/Sponsorship: Simplify to remove subjectivity
Definitions Current Score Proposed
Score
Coordination with other Up to 6 6
organizations
Intended beneficiaries involved in Up to 6 6
planning with inclusive marketing
Involved in the County's Up to 4 0
Consolidated Plan process
Links to other community services -Up to 4 4
In total, the Community Support category decreases from 20 to 16 points.
• Developer Experience: Require additional documentation
o Require documentation to establish past regulatory compliance.
o Require documentation to establish past ability to meet budgets and timelines. For
transparency and accountability, scorer must list the documentation provided.
o Score value remains unchanged (40 points)
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with reviewing and discussing
these changes in process.
ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLAN: This item supports:
• GOAL 3: HOUSING FOR ALL
OBJECTIVE 1. Allocate predictable funding sources to contribute or support adding to
affordable housing stock.
OBJECTIVE 4. Prioritize and select County-owned land and/or facilities as part of an
overall plan of facilities to create crisis, bridge, low barrier, affordable, and permanent
housing.
OBJECTIVE 5. Review County ordinances, policies, agreements, and the regulatory
processes to streamline practices, and increase opportunities and reduce barriers to
construct housing.
OBJECTIVE 6. Partner with public agencies to increase opportunities for public employees
to buy and rent homes where they work.
OBJECTIVE 7. Expand resources and invest in housing designed for our aging and
disabled residents.
OBJECTIVE 8. Preserve existing housing stock from disrepair and avoid displacement.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board review and discuss the
incorporation of stakeholder feedback from the 2023 Requests for Proposals (RFP) process into
the Affordable Housing Bond/Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Scoring Matrix.
5
Orange County Affordable Housing Bond Program Application
Scoring Form
2016 Bond/2020 Funding Cycle
Scorecard Instructions
Move through each tab of this scorecard and follow the directions at the top of each tab. Throughout the scorecard,
only enter information in green boxes;orange boxes will auto fill.Summary information will appear in the Scorecard
Summary section below.
Fill in the applicant name and your name below.
Applicant Name:
Scorer Name:
Scorecard Summary
Category Points Total points possible
1. Income Targeting and Special Needs #DIV/01 45
2. Local Residency FALSE
3. Leveraging 0 52
4. Building and Site Design 0 20
5. Community Design 0 20
6. Community Sponsorship/Support 0 20
7. Project Feasibility 0 30
8. Developer Experience 0 42
Total points #DIV/0! 234
6
0. Threshold requirements
Place an "X"in the green box by each threshold requirement that has been met.
FX The application is complete with all required attachments and was submitted by the established deadline
F—IThe project aligns with local affordable housing goals,strategies,and/or adopted policies
F Funding is for an eligible activity
7
1.Income Targeting and Special Needs(45 Points)
What income range(s)and population(s)will the proposed project serve?
Indicate the number of units serving each income range in the green boxes under"Income Targeting." Place an X in one green box under"Special Needs."Orange boxes will auto fill
Income Targeting Special Needs'
Number of units Prorated points Does the project serve people with special housing needs?
�61-80%AMI(10 points) #DIV/0! =Yes(20 points)
�31-60%AMI(1S points) #DIV/0! =No(0 points)
=30%AMI or below(2S points) #D!V/0! 0.00 F-FlTota units #DIV/0! Subtotal
'Defined as people with disabilities,veterans,people experiencing homelessness,holders of Housing Choice or other vouchers,and survivors of domestic violence
####TOTAL POINTS
8
2. Local Residency(5 Points)
What percentage of the proposed project will provide housing for Orange County residents?
Place an 'Y'in one green box by the appropriate percent of targeted units. Orange boxes will auto fill.
Percent of current Orange County residents'at sale or lease-up
�0-50%(0 points)
�50-80%(2 points)
�80-100%(5 points)
FALSE TOTAL POINTS
Defined as households currently residing or working in Orange County or having resided in Orange County
9
3. Leveraging (52 points)
To what degree does the proposed project include other sources of funds?
Use the space below to calculate leverage,then place an "X"in one green box by the appropriate leveraging ratio. Orange boxes will auto fill.
Percent Funded by County Funding Other Criteria
=81-100% (0 points) =Project pays property taxes(2 points)'
=60-80%(3 points) These two are mutually exclusive=Project repays bond funds-principal only(3 points)'
=40-59%(6 points) These two are mutually exclusive=Project repays bond funds-P+1 (10 points)'
=20-39%(9 points) =Project is mixed-income(10 points)Z
=10-19%(15 points) =Project is mixed-use(10 points)3
=< 10%(20 points) 'These criteria do not apply to nonprofit sponsored projects Subtotal
### Subtotal Z Meaning it serves more than one income range(including market rate)and minimizes geographic conentration
of affordable units
Caculate leverage
County funds (including Bond request) 'Meaning it includes non-residential uses that offer access to employment daily needs,and health and human
services
Other funds(non-County)
Percent County funding ##### =TOTAL POINTS
10
4. Building and Site Design (20 points)
Assign a number of points in the green boxes below according to your best judgment. You may provide a narrative explanation for each.
Narrative
Project incorporates sustainable design elements,
such as smaller building sizes, use of local/recycled
building materials, energy efficient features,'
LED lighting,water conservation fixtures, efficient
HVAC systems, etc. (up to 5 points)
OProject provides handicap accessibilty and/or
incorporates Universal Design (up to 5 points)
Project incorporates sustainable community and
environmental design elements, such as flexible
lot design, low impact development, storm water
controls, reduced impervious surface areas,
natural or drought-resistant landscaping, or any
other additional element that would serve to
minimize negative environmental impacts, as
Orange County regulations allow (up to 5 points)
Project is connected to water and sewer service,
will connect to existing service, or will use a
community well and sewer system consistent
with water and sewer boundary agreements
and local standards (up to 5 points)
TOTAL POINTS
Project meets/excceds NCHFA energy criteria: https://www.nchfa.com/sites/default/files/page attachmentslQAP20FinalAppendixB.pdf
2See: https://www.wbdg.org/design-objectives/accessible/beyond-accessibility-universal-design
11
S. Community Design (20 points)
Assign a number of points in the green boxes below according to your best judgment. You may provide a narrative explanation for each.
Narrative
Project contributes to a mix of housing within
existing neighborhood (up to 3 points)
Bonus points for building appearance, quality of
construction, compatibility with surrounding
housing, ability to foster a sense of a secure
community, and contribution to neighborhood
revitalization and/or affordable housing
preservation (details must be provided by
applicant (up to 5 points)
Project is accessible to services such as healthcare,
schools, groceries, etc.(up to 4 points)
Public transportation, to include a bus route or
on-demand service (or equivalent), and related
facilities are available (e.g., bus shelters,
accessible stops, etc.) (up to 5 points)
Project is located in an area of the county
traditionally underserved by housing development
(up to 3 points)
F0 TOTAL POINTS
12
6. Community Sponsorship/Support (20 points)
Assign a number of points in the green boxes below according to your best judgment. You may provide a narrative explanation for each.
Narrative
=Applicant can show evidence that they coordinated
with other organizations to complement/support
the proposed project (up to 6 points)
=Applicant can show evidence that they involved
the intended beneficiaries of the project in the
planning process and that the outreach and
marketing plan is inclusive (up to 6 points)
=Applicant can demonstrate it has been actively
involved, or describe the steps it will take to
become actively involved, in the County's
Consolidated Planning process to identify and
address a housing need related to the proposed
project(up to 4 points)
=Applicant has developed, or can demonstrate
plans to develop, links with other community
activities to provide holistic community services
(up to 4 points)
E0 TOTAL POINTS
13
7. Project Feasibility (30 points)
Assign a number of points in the green boxes below according to your best judgment.
Applicant can demonstrate site control,zoning compliance,and timely and feasible construction schedule (up to 10 points)
Funding(other than County funding) is in place at time of application (up to 10 points)
Applicant presents a proposed budget and financial model appropriate based on reasonable assumptions (up to 10 points)
F0 Total points
14
8. Developer Experience (40 points)
Assign a number of points in the green boxes below according to your best judgment.
Applicant has experience carrying out comparable projects to that proposed and has met regulatory compliance for
previous projects(up to 10 points)
Applicant has a proposed team with demonstrated development, managerial,and financial management capabilities in
prior projects(up to 10 points)
Applicant and team members have a successful record of meeting proposed budgets and timelines(up to 10 points)
F—IProject sponsor is a nonprofit housing provider(up to 10 points)
F0 Total points
15
ORANGE COUNTY
HOUSING DEPARTMENT
Affordable Housing Bond/ CIP
Scoring Matrix Recommendations
November 12, 2024
16
Stakeholder Concerns
Process and Scorecard confusing and subjective
Leveraging and repayment to county needs to be
reevaluated
The following criteria and/or projects need more
prioritization :
Repair/rehabilitation projects
Applicant past performance/accountability
Housing for 60% AM I and below
Residents with disabilities
Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH )
nORANGE COUNTY
� HOUSING DEPARTMENT
17
General changes to process
Affordable Housing Advisory Board (AHAB) will not
score projects
ARAB scored projects for first time in 2023
Scoring shifts back to staff interdepartmental work group
Staff will present scores to AHAB for comment before BOCC
Add 10% CIP carve-out for Repair/Rehabilitation
New scoring matrix will be created for repair/rehabilitation
proposals, to be reviewed by the Board at a later date.
Simplify scorecard, prioritize 60% AMI or below
projects, assess applicants' past performance, and
streamline monitoring/evaluation
ORANGE COUNTY
� HOUSING DEPARTMENT
18
Scorecard changes
Old Points New Points
i
Threshold Requirements Require documentation of alignment with specific Strategic NIA.
Plan Goals/Priorities
Income Targeting and Special • Add greater weight to 60% AMI and below 80% AMI: 10 10
Needs • Require explanation for how project serves special needs 60% AMI: 15 25
populations. 30% AMI: 25 35
• Considered specifically targeting people with disabilities,
but Fair Housing concerns raised
Residency Delete due to difficulty screening and monitoring 5 0
Leveraging • Prioritize projects that can repay bond funding 33 50
• Increased points from 3 to 10 and 10 to 20 for projects
that can repay Principal , or Principal + Interest,
respectively
• Simplify number of tiers from 6 to 4
• New Tiers for percent of project County-funded:
75-100%: 0 pts
50-75%: 5 pts
25-50%: 10 pts
0-25%: 20 pts
Building/Site Design Remove points for accessibility (modern requirement) 20 15
19
Scorecard changes
Old Points New Points
pop �VL -AN&-
i
Community Design Better define terms: 181, 15.
"Accessibility to needed Goods and Services" = Min 1 mi
"Access to Public Transportation" = Min '/2 mi
"Traditionally underserved" part of the county =
unincorporated Orange County
• Change point awards from "up to" to either/or in order to
increase objectivity
• Eliminate bonus points for aesthetic appearance
Community Change point awards from "up to" to either/or in order to 20 16
Support/Sponsorship increase objectivity
• Delete criterion of participation in Consolidated Plan
Developer Experience Require additional documentation, and that documentation 40 40
be listed by scorer
ORANGE COUNTY
HOUSING DEPARTMENT
zo
Please contact County Manager or Housing
Director with questions
Blake Rosser
brosser@orangecountync . gov
919-245-2492
ORANGE COUNTY
� HOUSING DEPARTMENT