HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_SKHHP_ExecutiveBoard_Mar_15_2024 - Approved
SKHHP Executive Meeting
March 15, 2024
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Dana Ralph called the meeting to order at 1:07 PM.
ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Executive Board members present: Dana Ralph, City of Kent; Kristina Soltys, City of
Covington; Traci Buxton, City of Des Moines; Brian Davis, City of Federal Way; Sunaree
Marshall, King County; Sean Kelly, City of Maple Valley; Eric Zimmerman, City of Normandy
Park; Carmen Rivera, City of Renton; James Lovell, City of SeaTac; Thomas McLeod, City of
Tukwila.
Others present: James Alberson, City of Renton; Victoria Schroff, City of Maple Valley; Claire
Goodwin, SKHHP Executive Manager; Dorsol Plants, SKHHP Program Coordinator; Kathleen
Hosfeld, SKHHP Advisory Board; Laural Humphrey, City of Tukwila; Nicholas Matz, City of
Normandy Park; McCaela Daffern, King County; Nicole Nordholm, City of Des Moines; Merina
Hanson, City of Kent; Dafne Hernandez, City of Covington.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment was provided.
III. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 16, 2024 MINUTES
Traci Buxton moved to approve the February 16, 2024 minutes as presented, seconded by
Sean Kelly. Motion passed (10-0)
IV. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS
No modifications to the agenda were made.
V. BOARD BUSINESS
a. 2025 SKHHP WORK PLAN DEVELOPMENT
Claire Goodwin welcomed everyone to the first in-person meeting of the year and invited the
Board to introduce themselves to the three new SKHHP Board Members. Claire Goodwin
reviewed the agenda for the day.
Claire Goodwin facilitated an introductory ice-breaker and Board Members played human bingo
with Carmen Rivera winning the game in under three minutes.
Claire Goodwin reviewed the mission statement, whereas statements, and purpose of SKHHP
that are located in the SKHHP formation Interlocal Agreement (ILA).
SKHHP’s Mission Statement: “South King County jurisdictions working together and sharing
resources to create a coordinated, comprehensive, and equitable approach to increasing
housing stability, reducing homelessness, and producing and preserving quality affordable
housing in South King County.”
SKHHP formation ILA Whereas statements:
“WHEREAS, the Parties have a common goal to ensure the availability of housing that meets
the needs of all income levels in South King County; and
WHEREAS, the Parties wish to provide a sound base of housing policies and programs in South
King County and to complement the efforts of existing public and private organizations to
address housing needs in South King County; and
WHEREAS, the Parties wish to act cooperatively to formulate affordable housing policies and
strategies that address housing stability, to foster efforts to preserve and provide affordable
housing by combining public funding with private-sector resources, to support implementation of
the goals of the Washington State (the "State") Growth Management Act, related countywide
planning policies, and other local policies and programs relating to affordable housing, and to do
so efficiently and expeditiously; and
WHEREAS, the Parties have determined that the most efficient and expeditious way for the
Parties to address affordable housing needs in South King County is through cooperative action
and pooling public and private resources; and
WHEREAS, the intent of this cooperative undertaking is not to duplicate efforts of non-profit
corporations and other entities already providing affordable-housing-related services; and
WHEREAS, a cooperative work plan with a primary focus on the production and preservation of
affordable housing, is needed because the lack of access to affordable housing is one of the
key contributors to homelessness;
SKHHP's purpose, as described in the ILA, is as follows: "All parties to this agreement have a
responsibility for local and regional planning for the provision of housing affordable to residents
that work and/or live in South King County. The parties agree to act cooperatively to formulate
affordable housing policies that address housing stability and to foster efforts to preserve and
provide affordable housing by combining public funding with private-sector resources."
Claire Goodwin reviewed the Work Plan Development Process. The process began last month
with surveys to the Executive and Advisory Board. The initial draft work plan was shared with
the Staff Work Group, and feedback was received. The draft being reviewed today incorporates
input from the surveys and the Staff Work Group. Based on feedback from today's discussion,
Claire Goodwin will modify any needed changes to the Work Plan and present it to the Advisory
Board and Staff Work Group for any final feedback. Due to her maternity leave approaching, the
goal is for the Executive Board to consider the final draft of the Work Plan and Budget and
consider adoption in April. Once the Executive Board adopts the 2025 SKHHP Work Plan and
Budget, SKKHP staff will circulate the Work Plan and agenda materials to each Staff Work
Group Member who has agreed to shepherd the Work Plan through the member City Council
process this year.
The meeting agenda packet included a redline and a clean draft of the 2025 Work Plan and
Budget. Based on conversations with Executive Board Members in December, there wasn’t a
desire to see any major changes to the Work Plan, and the four goals remain intact. All the
proposed changes to the draft are made using that information, supplemented with the Work
Plan survey results and the Staff Work Group feedback.
Claire Goodwin reviewed the suggested changes to the 2024 Work Plan to draft the 2025 Work
Plan. Several items were removed and are proposed to not be carried forward in 2025.
Proposed items to remove:
“Develop a long-term funding strategy for the Housing Capital Fund." During last year's
discussion, it was agreed that a positive approach is to partner with others, advocate for funding
at the state and federal levels, and target philanthropic partners. SKHHP is still building the
collective funding response by pooling new resources from our members. Much of the focus last
year and this year will be on facilitating those new revenue sources for the Housing Capital
Fund.
“Work with member cities and project sponsors to start developing a pipeline of projects to be
funded over the next five years.” Claire Goodwin recommends removing it from the Work Plan
since it is not critical work for SKHHP, and a regional pipeline of LIHTC projects is already being
developed in collaboration with other public funders.
“Continue to refine and update the housing policy matrix.” Claire Goodwin recommends
removing it since this is not a body of work currently connected to any active project, and it
could be reinstated administratively if it is found to be a relevant resource.
“Produce public facing communications content that highlights South King County through social
media and newsletters." SKHHP staff have been working to produce these items since last year
and have found that the newsletters take an incredible amount of staff time to ensure SKHHP
publishes accurate, well-vetted, public-facing materials. SKHHP staff will continue to advertise
the Housing Capital Fund notice of funding availability (NOFA) and the Executive Board's
recommendation on funding through a newsletter and social media.
“Manage the Affordable Housing Inventory Dashboard contract.” This work plan item references
the Housing Action Plan Implementation (HAPI) grant, and that contract was finished last year.
SKHHP staff will be engaging Berk Consulting to continue the maintenance and data updates
this year through funding provided by SeaTac but does not need to be listed on the work plan.
“Advance work on SKHHP Foundation efforts to establish logistics, administration, and pursue
federal nonprofit status.” This is recommended for removal because it is an incredible body of
work where an additional full-time staff person would be needed to manage the 501c3 and
resources to fund a contracted auditor with subject matter expertise in 501c3 accounting. The
original intent of this work was to increase funds available for South King County-based
projects. That goal can be achieved in other ways that don't involve the establishment of a
501c3, such as working with philanthropies to fund projects directly in South King County.
Three Action Items were added to the draft to reflect work currently being undertaken by
SKHHP staff:
“Develop and execute contract documents and covenants for projects ready to move forward.”
This is in regards to the administrative work related to the Housing Capital Fund projects.
“Meet with legislators as opportunities arise to inform about SKHHP’s mission, goals, and the
Housing Capital Fund.” This was important during the 2024 Legislative session to inform the
legislature about the vital work being done in South King County.
“Connect affordable housing developers with property owners who intend to sell naturally
occurring affordable housing (NOAH).” SKHHP staff will forward NOAH information to non-profit
developers for jurisdictions with a Notice of Intent to Sell policy and pass forward direct
connections with developers who have coordinated directly with SKHHP to maintain
affordability.
Two Action Items were modified:
Items related to the administration of the Housing Capital Fund were broken apart and details
added. This is to provide a deeper understanding of the work SKHHP staff are doing behind the
scenes to administer the Housing Capital Fund and the contract documents.
Subregional preservation strategies were modified to acknowledge the updated progress and
transition into supporting the implementation of any preservation strategies where there is
alignment across the majority of jurisdictions and where the item would benefit from cross-
jurisdiction coordination.
Traci Buxton spoke about Goal 3 Action 14, “Meet with legislators as opportunities arise to
inform about SKHHP’s mission, goals, and the Housing Capital Fund," and the importance of
representing the current work and needs in South King County. Dana Ralph added the work
would also help avoid unintended consequences of new legislation.
Traci Buxton asked if there was a coordinated outreach related to the notice of property sales or
if it was reactive to when staff became aware of potential sales. Claire Goodwin responded that
this item came out of work in the SoKiHo group and is still being developed based on the needs
of the member jurisdictions.
Dana Ralph sought to confirm that SKHHP staff would work in connection with the local
jurisdiction when sharing information about property sales. Claire Goodwin confirmed that was
the intent and would include language in the document to clarify that SKHHP staff would
coordinate with local jurisdictions.
Carmen Rivera said that Goal 3 Action Item 14 should be a higher priority in the document since
it was essential to the work of SKHHP. Claire Goodwin provided greater detail about the
prioritization of the action items. The higher priority items are the items that are required either
by the ILA or were directed as essential by the Executive Board, such as the administration of
the Housing Capital Fund. Medium priority items are the items that come immediately after the
higher items are accomplished, and the lower priority items are the items that are left. As a low
priority, SKHHP would not actively seek opportunities, but it does not mean it's unimportant.
Carmen Rivera asked if the Executive Board members could proactively contact legislators and
other elected officials to support Goal 3 Action Item 14. Claire Goodwin confirmed that was an
option and that the 2024 Legislative Priority was intended for Executive Board members to be
able to amplify SKHHP's voice. Dana Ralph provided historical context on how the Executive
Board has handled state-level advocacy for the diverse needs of South King County. Traci
Buxton added that the item was a higher priority during the formation of SKHHP and supported
keeping it on the priority list. James Lovell added that state-level advocacy is complex across
the subregion, which has fifteen or more legislative districts with unique challenges and needs.
Claire Goodwin developed a handout to quantify and estimate what percentage of staff time
over a year would be dedicated to each work plan item. It is broken out between the two
SKHHP staff roles: the Executive Manager and the Program Coordinator. Vacation and holiday
time were accounted for in the assessment. Most of the Executive Manager’s time is spent on
the higher priority items, almost 90%. The total staff capacity for one FTE is 100%, and the
Executive Manager's capacity is reported at 106%. The Program Coordinator is reported to
have a capacity of 95%, which enables the position to support projects as they come up or
provide additional support where needed. The staff capacity analysis intends to provide context
for the removed work plan action items and potential items to add to the work plan that Board
Members identified.
Claire Goodwin reviewed the “Executive Board 2025 SKHHP Work Plan Development Survey"
results. The results from Question 2, “If you had to remove two items from the 2024 work plan
that don't get carried over into 2025, what would they be?" were all over the map. The Action
Item to, “Produce public facing communications” had the most votes and was removed from the
draft. A few votes were made to remove the efforts to establish a 501c3, which was also
removed from the draft. Finally, a few votes were made to remove the 5-year project pipeline
item, which was also removed from the draft.
Claire Goodwin reviewed the results of Question 1,” Is there anything missing from the 2024
work plan that you would love to see added to the 2025 work plan?” She prefaced the results,
pointing out that adding any items to the work plan will likely lead to removing or deprioritizing
an existing item. Half of the respondents stated that the work plan is very comprehensive and
does not recommend adding items.
Two respondents stated that they were newer members and needed to be more familiar with the
plan to suggest additions.
One response suggested adding an action item to work with Maple Valley to adopt an ongoing
policy to fund the Housing Capital Fund. Maple Valley will begin contributing to the SKHHP
Housing Capital Fund this year and developing a policy this year, therefore SKHHP will already
be supporting the item this year.
One response proposed, "Coordinate subregional rules of engagement for organizations
providing services for housing and homelessness in SKC to engage cities from the start." This
is in response to several housing and homelessness organizations establishing themselves in
South King County cities but not engaging with them. This item could mean we hold a series of
meetings at the Executive Board level and work with your Human Services Planners to develop
some unified rules of engagement for housing and homelessness service providers operating in
South King County.
One response was to rebrand SKHHP to remove homelessness from the title. This is in
response to the Executive Board's discussion about focusing on housing as the primary way
SKHHP addressed homelessness. The SKHHP founding ILA may need to be changed, and
significant work would be required to find consensus on a new name, update materials to reflect
changes, and get the word out about the name change.
Brian Davis said that the word "homelessness" has grown to become an all-encompassing
word, but some retain a narrower definition than SKHHP uses. For many, the definition of
"homelessness" is specific to unsheltered individuals. SKHHP's efforts have not been
specifically targeted to support the unsheltered, and including "homelessness" in SKHHP's
name convolutes SKHHP's focused efforts to end homelessness through building housing.
The final response was to “discuss how best to honor homelessness in SKHHP’s work.” Claire
Goodwin interpreted this as holding one or two meetings at the Executive Board level to discuss
this and come to an agreement. The question continues to arise, and taking time to discuss it
may be beneficial for the Executive Board.
Dana Ralph added that when SKHHP was founded, the conversation was about preventing
homelessness through housing. The term has evolved since SKHHP's founding, and the ILA
states that SKHHP should not duplicate the work of other government agencies. The King
County Regional Homelessness Authority (KCRHA) and other programs did not exist when
SKHHP was founded, and it would be beneficial to understand SKHHP's relationship with these
different agencies working on the topic better. She agreed that the term "homelessness" can be
misleading or create confusion when someone is less informed about SKHHP's work.
Traci Buxton said one item to consider is the difference between solution and response, and
SKHHP provides a productive response to homelessness. The term in SKHHP's title could be
perceived as a tool or permission, and there isn't a need to respond to every aspect of the vision
of SKHHP right now. This could be a growth area for SKHHP, not as a solution but as a
response to homelessness. SKHHP is still too young as an organization to remove future
opportunities for our work. Claire Goodwin added that everyone in the room would have a
chance to vote on the three options to consider adding to the Work Plan.
Carmen Rivera agreed that King County has a vast definition of homelessness. She continued
that there is much variety in service responses, and some projects create barriers to accessing
services, such as denying family members the ability to stay together. Shelters are not always
safe places, and program participants have reported being physically and sexually assaulted
while staying in programs. The conversation about why someone would turn down a housing or
shelter referral is nuanced and complex. Carmen Rivera concurred with Traci Buxton that it is
too early in SKHHP’s life to remove items or categories of work. While including it in SKHHP’s
name may confuse some people, it is also a call to action for SKHHP to do more.
James Lovell concurred with leaving homelessness in SKHHP's name. SKHHP is still young,
and rebranding now could create confusion. Additionally, some of the organizations working on
the issue are new, and it is not certain that they will meet the needs of South King County. He
concluded that most of the region's service providers identify an increase in housing as the
solution for homelessness in our region.
Kristina Soltys stated that housing and homelessness were two huge hats, and she wasn't sure
it was work that SKHHP should be doing. SKHHP's priority was not to end homelessness, and
she stated uncertainty that if everyone were provided a housing opportunity, it would end
homelessness in a month. She was unsure if it should be eliminated from SKHHP's name, but it
was worth discussing because of the growing definition of homelessness.
Eric Zimmerman added that he agreed with the challenge of the two terms, housing and
homelessness. There are other groups that members of the Executive Board meet to discuss
homelessness, and with the homeless policy fragmenting in different directions, SKHHP's focus
on housing was great. He added that each SKHHP jurisdiction would have different views on
the approach to homelessness, and focusing on housing would avoid potential divergence.
Claire Goodwin facilitated an in-person exercise to select how to respond to action items
requested to be added to the work plan.
1. Coordinate subregional rules of engagement for organizations providing services for
housing and homelessness in SKC to engage cities from the start. (0)
2. Rebranding to remove “homelessness” from title. (0)
3. Discuss how best to honor homelessness in SKHHP’s work. (5)
Five Board members withheld their vote to select an item to add to the Work Plan, and two
Board members were absent from the meeting.
Claire Goodwin reviewed the draft 2025 budget. No member jurisdiction will be moving into a
new population tier, and the draft reflects a 15% increase in member dues since last year. The
Executive Board adopted a policy in July 2021 to increase member dues each year by 15%
through 2026. The goal was to work towards a balanced budget whereby our revenues could
fully support our expenditures. Each member’s City Council was briefed on the increases in
2023.
Staff salaries and benefits are proposed to increase by 5%. Interfund IT is the amount our
administering agency charges to each department by FTE to support our IT needs, and it is
growing by 11%. The Advisory Board compensation, travel, and supplies are unchanged, and
the Professional Services/Misc category is increasing to accommodate legal assistance. This is
needed to develop the housing contracts and third-party review of applications. It also
incorporates professional development from the 2024 budget to align with how our
administering agency tracks expenditure line items and categories. The additional funds will
support the legal fees for developing and reviewing three contracts and the third-party review of
two projects.
In 2023, the interest earnings from Housing Capital Fund contributions were $132,000. The
annual and quarterly reports included the interest earnings in the operating fund balance. The
SKHHP founding ILA is specific in how interest earnings should be tracked but not how they
should be spent. The ILA says: "Investment earnings will be credited to each individual/sub-
account on a pro-rata basis." The Executive Board has yet to discuss how the interest earnings
should be handled when accounting for the pro-rata contributions.
Thomas McLeod asked whether the $132,000 earned interest for the Housing Capital Fund
would be added to the fund and credited to the city as contributions. Claire Goodwin confirmed
that was the current direction from the ILA.
Claire Goodwin presented the Executive Board with three options for directing SKHHP staff to
use the interest earnings. The beginning and ending fund balances of the draft 2025 budget are
not listed pending the Executive Board’s feedback on using the interest earnings.
Option 1: Incorporate the interest earnings into the operating budget fund balance for the
2025 budget.
Option 2: Apply the interest earnings to the Housing Capital Fund.
Option 3: Postpone the decision until next year.
Sunaree Marshall asked if SKHHP staff had investigated if 10% of the SHB 1406 funds collected
could be used for administrative purposes. Claire Goodwin confirmed the topic would come up as
part of the Housing Capital Fund Guidelines discussion.
Sunaree Marshall said lenders and banks are beginning to change their relationship with the
affordable housing market. She expressed caution with Option 2 because there is uncertainty in
the affordable housing market over the next few years. SKHHP may need additional legal support
to handle the new environment and contracting requirements.
Thomas McLeod asked if the earned interest was solely on the Housing Capital Funds or if the
Operational Contributions have also earned interest. Claire Goodwin confirmed it was just the
Housing Capital Funds. As the funds wait to be distributed to awarded projects, the higher interest
rates are bringing in a substantial return. Thomas McLeod added that he liked the practice of
keeping the same funds together and liked Option 2.
Traci Buxton asked if HB 1590 funds could also be used for administrative costs. Claire Goodwin
stated her interpretation was no, but other jurisdictions may hold a different opinion. Traci Buxton
said she would need a definitive answer to the question about using SHB 1406 funds for
administrative costs. Claire Goodwin confirmed that she was confident that 10% of SHB 1406
funds could be used for administrative costs, but the enabling legislation of each jurisdiction would
need to be reviewed to confirm that SKHHP could implement the concept.
Traci Buxton asked if the law clearly stated that interests earned on SHB 1406 and HB 1590 funds
had to be considered capital fund dollars. Claire Goodwin stated that SKHHP received legal
advice that the interest could be used as capital fund dollars.
Traci Buxton asked if SKHHP is still spending down the overabundance in the operational budget
or if all revenues are being used for operations. Claire Goodwin responded that SKHHP is still
spending more on operations than it brings in. Traci Buxton asked if this meant SKHHP should
use the earned interest funds to support the operational budget. Claire Goodwin responded that
the Executive Board acted in 2021 to raise member dues to work toward a balanced budget. It
would be something to consider if a new body of work or additional staff was needed to
accommodate a work plan or contract change. SKHHP could also reduce spending in other areas.
Dana Ralph said she was fully supportive of SKHHP's collaborative nature and liked the option to
use it to stabilize the operating budget if it's allowed. It would be challenging for some jurisdictions
to see an increase in membership dues past the initial planned increases.
Sunaree Marshall mentioned that King County uses interest on its funds to pay for staff to
administer their contracts. This has become a regular practice among some funders since interest
earnings become more flexible once you have it.
Claire Goodwin asked if there was a general agreement to add the balance to the Housing Capital
Fund and consider adding the 10% from SHB 1406 for administrative costs next year. Dana Ralph
said the group wanted to solidify the legal opinion on utilizing 10% of SHB 1406 funds for
administrative expenses.
Eric Zimmerman added that he believes his jurisdiction would be willing to consider increasing its
membership contribution if it helped to balance the operational budget. Claire Goodwin responded
that it would be best to wait until 2026 when the current yearly increases to the membership
contribution are scheduled to end. At that time, SKHHP staff will better understand the budget
needs.
Sean Kelly asked for a cover letter reviewing the interest amounts and planned action to bring
back to his City Council. Claire Goodwin responded that a detailed breakdown of interest earned
would be provided as part of the 2025 SKHHP Work Plan and Budget presentations to member
councils.
Claire Goodwin will incorporate today’s feedback into the draft Work Plan and Budget and
present the updated version at the April Executive Board meeting. If no further changes are
needed, the aim will be to adopt the 2025 SKHHP Work Plan and Budget on April 19.
b. 2024 HOUSING CAPITAL FUND GUIDELINES AND PRIORITIES
Claire Goodwin transitioned into planning for the 2024 Housing Capital Fund, SKHHP's third
annual funding round. The Executive Board adopted annual guidelines in 2022 and made a few
revisions last year. The 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines were included in the agenda
packet for review.
This year, SKHHP was presented with an exciting opportunity with SeaTac joining us. When the
City of SeaTac joined SKHHP in January, the Council committed $300,000, sourced from
SeaTac’s General Fund, to support the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund. While there was some
discussion about the use of these funds at that time, Claire Goodwin communicated to the
SeaTac City Council that as unrestricted funds supporting the Housing Capital Fund, they could
be used to fund homeownership or preservation projects up to 80% AMI or apply to our existing
restrictions, just as examples.
Claire Goodwin is seeking feedback from the Executive Board on how the funds should be
used. The Board’s answer will affect how the funds are presented in the Guidelines. There are a
few options to consider, each with varying degrees of flexibility.
The most flexible option would be to add it to the guidelines as unrestricted and see where it fits
best based on the applications SKHHP receives. Applicants are not asked to indicate which
funding source they seek; SKKHP staff match their request with which funding sources could be
applied. SKHHP would use a similar process for general funds, except it would be noted that
eligible uses are within some parameters, such as funding up to 80% AMI.
General funds could also be added to either of the existing fund sources. For example, if applied
to the SHB 1406 funds available, the general funds would be restricted to the conditions set
forth for those funds. Funding projects up to 60% AMI, for example.
Another idea that doesn't allow for as much flexibility but may be a strong option given the
unrestricted nature of the funds is to fund the rehabilitation/preservation or homeownership
opportunities for 60%- 80% of AMI households.
Traci Buxton spoke in support of the first option.
Dana Ralph said she continues to be interested in preservation and homeownership and would
like to see SKHHP provide more opportunities for residents to own a home.
Sunaree Marshall agreed but noted that the General Fund amount is less than the smallest
amount requested by a project. SKHHP could say the funds are unrestricted, but we have a
preference as a funder. She also asked if the City of SeaTac would continue to use General
Funds for the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund. Claire Goodwin responded that likely moving
forward, SeaTac would not contribute from their General Fund.
Carmen Rivera responded that she agreed with Dana Ralph about supporting homeownership.
Thomas McLeod asked if they could put the funds in the more flexible option but move them
later if the Board wanted to move them to the less flexible option. Claire Goodwin responded
that it could be moved. For example, if the funds were applied to the flexible option but a project
needed additional funding during the application review, the amount could be moved to support
that project. This would be an element that the Advisory Board would also be able to support
and provide an opinion on.
Dana Ralph wanted to ensure outreach was increased to include more preservation and
homeownership projects and would like to ensure the available funds would all be spent.
Kristina Soltys supported the funds being used for homeownership and preservation, but with
few unrestricted funding sources, she would like to retain as much flexibility as possible.
Regarding funding priorities, Claire Goodwin recommended that the language around the
preservation priority be modified to include income-restricted properties and not just naturally
occurring affordable housing.
Additionally, the homeownership priority has been updated to include recent legislative changes
made by SB 6173, which allow RCW 82.14.540 funds to support affordable homeownership
projects up to 80% AMI. Up to four jurisdictions in SKHHP may have to update their enabling
legislation to include homeownership projects up to 80% AMI. SKHHP staff will notify the
jurisdictions that need to make a change, and the language will be flexible to allow funds to be
used up to 80% AMI if the SKHHP members support the change.
Claire Goodwin spoke about the Advisory Board’s expressed interest in adding Universal
Design to the funding priorities. Universal Design is a design practice that develops housing to
be accessible to all users. Examples of this practice include no-step entryways, curb-free
showers, and widened doorways to support wheelchair users. Claire Goodwin offered to
conduct additional research and present findings at the next Board meeting, especially as it
relates to the affordable housing developer perspective.
Dana Ralph said she needed more information but would be interested in learning more about
the topic. She expressed interest in a middle ground when including it as a priority, such as a
set number of units that support residents with disabilities.
Kristina Soltys expressed concerns about the additional costs and how they might impact a
project.
Eric Zimmerman said that in an emergency setting, you would build to support the most
significant need possible. Due to the nature of the crisis, there must be a balance between
reaching the greatest need and changing design standards to increase housing quality.
Sunaree Marshall said that Universal Design has been discussed during King County's funding
cycles, but that the County was still learning about the concept. She stated that the Executive
Board hasn't received a briefing on the topic yet. She would support having an educational
briefing over the summer.
Dana Ralph concluded there was a consensus not to include it as a priority in this funding
round, but there was a desire to learn more.
Claire Goodwin asked if there were any areas of the Housing Capital Fund priorities that the
Executive Board would like to change.
Dana Ralph acknowledged that the priorities were in alphabetical order, and there should be a
note that they are not in order of priority.
VI.UPDATES/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dorsol Plants prepared a final legislative review and included it in the agenda packet.
Claire Goodwin updated the Executive Board that she would take nineteen weeks of maternity
leave, and Jeff Tate would serve in her place while on leave. The Executive Board meetings will
continue with the briefing topics the Executive Board selected and an affordable housing tour.
SKHHP's work will continue during her maternity leave, except for contracting work.
VII. ADJOURN
Dana Ralph adjourned the meeting at 3:03 PM.
Program Coordinator-SKHHP