HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPPROVED Minutes_SKHHP_ExecutiveBoard_Apr_19_2024
SKHHP Executive Meeting
April 19, 2024
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Dana Ralph called the meeting to order at 1:03 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; Colleen Brandt-Schluter, City of Burien.
Others present: James Alberson, City of Renton; Victoria Schroff, City of Maple Valley; Xochitl
Maykovich, King County; Claire Goodwin, SKHHP Executive Manager; Dorsol Plants, SKHHP
Program Coordinator; Laural Humphrey, City of Tukwila; Nicholas Matz, City of Normandy Park;
Nicole Nordholm, City of Des Moines; Kaelene Nobis, City of Kent; Dafne Hernandez, City of
Covington; Matt Torpey, City of Maple Valley; Angie Mathias, City of Renton.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment was provided.
III. APPROVAL OF MARCH 15, 2024 MINUTES
Thomas McLeod moved to approve the March 15, 2024 minutes as presented, seconded by
Sean Kelly. Motion passed (10-0)
Kristina Soltys joined the Executive Board meeting at 1:10 PM.
IV. AGENDA MODIFICATIONS
No modifications to the agenda were made.
V. BOARD BRIEFING
a. SOUTH KING COUNTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRESERVATION STRATEGIES
Claire Goodwin introduced the South King County Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies
by providing the historical background. The desire of the SKHHP Executive Board to address
housing preservation as a subregion has been a high priority going back to at least 2021 and
has shown up on SKHHP’s work plans since at least 2022.
You may recall that SKHHP worked to develop an Affordable Housing Inventory Dashboard for
jurisdiction long-range planners to use internally. The dashboard allows planning staff to see
where known naturally occurring affordable housing is and where it's predicted to be in South
King County. It was the beginning of SKHHP's subregional effort to address affordable housing
preservation.
Efforts to begin the development of the Subregional Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies
started in the fall of last year when the connection was made on the timing of our work
coinciding with the required 10-year periodic update of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan.
This work includes a requirement to address the preservation and displacement of vulnerable
residents. This was great timing because preservation has been a high priority of the Executive
Board for many years, and our timing is in alignment with each of your jurisdiction's
development and adoption of the Comprehensive Plans, which are due at the end of this year,
though many of your jurisdictions have already submitted drafts for review to the County.
Board Members serving last year might recall that last September, as part of the in-person
monthly meeting, planning staff were invited from each of the SKHHP cities to discuss the
preservation needs of their respective jurisdictions. Executive Board Members also completed a
survey, which provided some great insight and helped define your jurisdiction's preservation
challenges. The information exchanged at that meeting kicked off the development of the
Subregional Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies, which is being discussed today.
The planners and SKHHP staff met at least every month and, in some cases, multiple times a
month, throughout the fall to develop the document included in your agenda packet. The
Preservation Strategies provide a guide for each jurisdiction to consider incorporating into their
Comprehensive Plan. It is designed so that jurisdictions can use it in a way that best suits each
individual city. Planners are welcome to copy and paste what works and leave out what does
not apply to their city.
SKHHP's goal was to encourage as much alignment as possible across the diverse subregion
while fully understanding and appreciating the autonomy of each jurisdiction’s legislative bodies
in determining what gets adopted in their Comprehensive Plans. Each jurisdiction likely has a
small handful of items that align with the Preservation Strategies and some cities may consider
attaching the strategy in their Comprehensive Plan. Some items may be phrased differently in
your jurisdiction’s final plan, but the concept is the same. We would consider this alignment with
the strategy.
SKHHP staff are committed to facilitating the implementation of any policy or action that all or
most cities adopt in their comprehensive plans related to preservation or displacement and
where subregional coordination is required.
The South King County Affordable Housing Preservation Strategies are organized by goals,
policies, and implementing actions. This is based on terminology regularly used by planners and
is how the Department of Commerce wants to see the Comprehensive Plans formatted. Goals
are the higher-level objectives; policies are the high-level ways of achieving the goals, and the
overall policy of jurisdictions on the topic in question, and implementing actions are those
actions that will be done to advance the policies and goals.
The Strategies include three goals. Claire Goodwin reviewed each goal and one policy and one
implementing action for each due to the length of the document. The entire document is
available in the agenda packet (and can be found on the SKHHP website after the meeting).
Goal 1: Preserve the existing supply of affordable housing. This goal has six policies and six
implementing actions. Policy 1.2 example: Develop strategies to preserve naturally occurring
affordable housing at risk of redevelopment and rehabilitate units when they don't pose a health
or safety risk. Implementing action example: Explore incentives to landlords, such as tax relief,
for the preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing.
Goal 2: Ensure rental housing stock is safe and habitable. Goal 2 has four policies and five
implementing actions. Policy 2.2 example: Ensure that rental housing units comply with life and
fire safety standards and provide a safe place for tenants to live, including renters with
disabilities. Implementing action example: Support the development or continuation of a rental
licensing/registration and inspection program. Explore options for establishing a program on a
subregional level.
Goal 3: Keep people in their homes and protect communities at risk of economic, physical, and
cultural displacement. This goal has seven policies and eight implementing actions. Policy 3.1
example: Explore opportunities to implement a Community Preference policy or a first right-to-
return policy that prioritizes community members in new housing developments. Implementing
action example: Build relationships with various partners (non-profit developers, faith-based
organizations, philanthropic organizations, local businesses, and community-based
organizations) to collaborate on solutions that keep people in their homes and prevent
displacement.
Other parts of the document include an introduction that describes the document’s purpose, a
glossary of definitions, and a table that shows alignment with the required Countywide Planning
Policies (CPPs), which the planners must show as a requirement of the State and County.
Claire Goodwin invited the long-range planners responsible for developing the strategy to speak
for three to five minutes about how the content of the strategies will be/has been incorporated
into their draft Comprehensive Plans, the unique aspects of preservation or anti-displacement
that their jurisdiction is addressing, how the strategy aligns with those aspects, and their feelings
on the overall process of developing this collaborative subregional document.
Not everyone who participated in this work was available today. Claire Goodwin acknowledged
the leadership and collaborative nature of Kristen Holdsworth, the Long-Range Planning
Manager of the City of Kent, and Chaney Skadsen, the Senior Planner of the City of Federal
Way, who both saw the alignment early on between what the cities were required to do through
their comprehensive planning processes and SKHHP's work plan item. Claire Goodwin
extended gratitude to all the planners who made the work possible.
Josh Steiner, Senior Long-Range Planner for the City of Auburn, explained that Auburn had
developed a Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment as part of the 2024
Comprehensive Plan work, which provided policy and technical analysis to comply with state,
regional, and county requirements regarding housing capacity and affordability. Auburn staff
thoroughly reviewed existing goals and policies to identify policies that may need to be
amended to meet those agency requirements. They discovered that many of the goals and
policies were still applicable, and there were opportunities to introduce new content, such as the
preservation of existing affordable housing, identifying communities at risk of displacement, and
identifying mitigation strategies. Displacement was recognized as a concern as most of
Auburn’s renters have household incomes at or below 50% AMI, especially BIPOC renters. The
Preservation Strategies and the guidance that SKHHP and other cities provided generated a
great list of policies, goals, and actions to include in Auburn's Housing Element. It was helpful to
know that there was consensus on several preservation policies, as housing is a regional
challenge. Auburn's Housing Element was accepted by the Planning Commission on April 16,
with the intention of the Auburn City Council adopting the plan in early July.
Dafne Hernandez, Associate Planner for the City of Covington, is primarily responsible for the
Comprehensive Plan update. Covington is unique compared to other SKHHP cities,
incorporated in 1997, most of the housing stock is still newer and not in need of preservation. It
was important for Covington to point out the partnership with SKHHP as part of its
Comprehensive Plan development. As part of developing the Preservation Strategies,
Covington discovered that housing maintenance was not explicitly called out as part of its
Housing Element. The city would use language related to Goal 2 of the strategies to encourage
maintaining the current housing stock, focusing on high-level policies to prepare the city as the
housing stock ages. Dafne Hernandez found the collaborative process helpful, and it provided
an opportunity to learn more about what the other cities in SKHHP are doing to preserve
housing.
Kaelene Nobis, Long-Range Planner for the City of Kent, informed the Executive Board that as
part of a previous collaborative effort with SKHHP, Kent had adopted a Housing Option Plan in
2021. This laid the groundwork for Kent to establish nine anti-displacement and housing
preservation policies in the city’s plan. Since the adoption of the plan, significant changes have
been made with state laws, Countywide Planning Policies, and the Puget Sound Regional
Council’s Vision 2050 planning policies, which has necessitated a revisit of all policies the city
had in place. The City of Kent appreciates that SKHHP has taken the lead in identifying options
to meet these requirements on a subregional scale. Over several months, planners would share
ideas and resources while trying to navigate each city's unique character to find some
alignment. While there were common challenges and goals, the implementation differed across
each city. Kent added its unique experience and expertise, including a study of the city's
mobile/manufactured home parks. Kent found that it was essential to talk about housing health
and safety along with the preservation of affordability. Kent appreciated learning from other
cities about programs like rental housing inspections that operated differently or the results of
implementing housing action plans. The City of Kent will use the Housing Options Plan
alongside the Preservation Strategies when developing a draft Comprehensive Plan. Kaelene
Nobis highlighted the usefulness of the matrix at the end of strategies, demonstrating how
action ties directly into implementing the policies.
Matt Torpey, Community Development Manager for the City of Maple Valley, said Maple Valley
is like Covington, with mostly newer housing stock stemming from the city's incorporation in
1997. The city has a high amount of market-rate housing with some naturally occurring
affordable housing, such as mobile home parks and income-restricted units. Maple Valley has
seen most of its single-family zones built out and anticipates a shift to more multi-family and
mixed-use sites as the city grows. Trying to get ahead of the growth, Maple Valley implemented
a policy a couple of years ago that requires a minimum of 10% of all units to be affordable to
households making 70% AMI or less with no sunset clause. The city has 400 available units
coming online in the next couple of years. Maple Valley is also ahead of some of the other
jurisdictions and was the first to submit its Comprehensive Plan to King County for review, and
the reaction from King County has been primarily positive. While the Comprehensive Plan was
submitted before the final version of the Preservation Strategies, Maple Valley worked to
incorporate it into its plan during the drafting process. Several of the policies in Maple Valley's
Comprehensive Plan align with the goals described in the Preservation Strategies, including
preserving existing housing stock that meets the affordable needs of the community, supporting
mobile/manufactured home parks, and working collaboratively with groups such as SKHHP.
Maple Valley has also designated significant SHB 1406 funds to support rental assistance
through local non-profits. Matt Torpey believes the city will have an amazing Comprehensive
Plan and Housing Element as part of SKHHP’s collaborative efforts.
Nicholas Matz, Community Development Director for the City of Normandy Park, explained that
the city has a smaller population and housing stock when compared to other SKHHP cities.
Mayor Eric Zimmerman's support has been an essential element of the housing work Nicholas
Matz and his team have done on behalf of the city. Normandy Park has been focused on
meeting its housing needs by income band, and the Preservation Strategies has been helpful to
the city's focus on the naturally occurring affordable housing in their community. Nicholas Matz
said the city intends to include policies 1.2, 1.5, 2.2, and 3.4 from the Preservation Strategies in
the draft Housing Element with tactical implementation around them. An example related to
Goal 1 is how the city is not identifying capacity in the multi-family zones because that is where
the naturally occurring affordable housing is located. Under policy 2.2, the city will continue to
bring forward the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund Resolutions and support the capital fund, which
includes a preservation project in 2023. Finally, under Goal 3, the city is excited to discuss new
partnerships with affordable housing providers and religious organizations that hold buildable
land. The Preservation Strategies were developed collaboratively, which made the final product
stronger. For Normandy Park, it's a cookbook the city can update for its own needs, knowing
that the region uses the same cookbook.
Angie Mathias, Long-Range Planning Manager for the City of Renton, appreciated the
opportunity to collaborate with SKHHP and the other cities as part of the development of the
Preservation Strategies. The City of Renton is older, with some housing stock close to one
hundred years old, including some housing built during World War II. Renton also experienced a
lot of upward market pressure, with one townhome recently selling for roughly $900,000. The
city already has several policies related to preserving existing housing, but the policies need to
be strengthened, and the Preservation Strategies will undoubtedly help.
Neil Tabor from the City of Tukwila was scheduled to present, but he had a family emergency
and wasn't available.
Claire Goodwin read a letter on behalf of Chaney Skadsen from the City of Federal Way, who
could not attend the meeting but wanted to speak about the work to develop the Preservation
Strategies. “By 2044, Federal Way is expected to accommodate 11.,260 new housing units 66%
of which are needed above 80% AMI. The composition of the future housing need allocated to
Federal Way is informed by the existing housing stock of which nearly four firths ( or 80%) was
constructed between the 1960s and 1990s. The majority of existing housing in Federal Way
serves households within the 50-80% Area Median Income (AMI) bracket. These units, totaling
over 13,000, are essential contributors to the city's housing landscape, providing affordable
options to low-income households. However, this segment of the Federal Way housing stock
faces challenges and at risk of vanishing amidst an increasingly competitive market. Federal
Way and neighboring South King County cities have historically experienced lower property
values compared to metropolitan cities like Seattle and Bellevue, the public investment in
regional transportation and the siting of future light rail stations through South King County is
expected to accelerate housing prices in South King County adding additional pressure.
While some units remain affordable due to income-restricted covenants and agreements, many
are approaching term limits with pending expirations or have no protections at all. A majority of
Federal Way's affordable housing is attributed to Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing
(NOAH). NOAH represents unsubsidized housing that remains affordable due to factors like
age, location, amenities, and building condition rather than income restrictions or government
subsidies. In light of these challenges, preserving existing affordable housing ensures a range
of housing options for residents with varying income levels. Moreover, preservation also
promotes equitable housing related outcomes as certain racial groups are disproportionately
cost burdened and severely cost burdened leading to increased vulnerability to displacement
and more likely to be affected by housing instability.
While planning to meet the future housing need in Federal Way, one primary focus is stimulating
residential development for market rate housing to meet the largest share of housing need.
These efforts can be paired with the preservation of existing affordable units for a time efficient
and cost-effective approach to supporting and maintaining a balanced housing stock when
compared to focusing on developing new affordable housing alone.
Preserving these units presents its own set of challenges. Programing and funding to control
fading conditions from deferred maintenance, monitoring impending expiration of income-
restricted covenants, and developing tools to address rising costs may be best studied and
addressed at a subregional level with neighboring cities sharing demographic and market
realities.
Over the last 6 months SKHHP has hosted a series of meetings with the South King County
Housing Planners (SoKiHo) to discuss the Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update and
compliance with the Growth Management Act, VISION 2050, and the King County Countywide
Policies.”
Claire Goodwin thanked all the planners for their efforts to develop the Preservation Strategies
and for being available to present at the meeting today.
SKHHP will share the Preservation Strategies on our website, and SoKiHo will take an inventory
of where the thru-lines and overlap are across the jurisdictions in the completed and adopted
comprehensive plans. Based on that information, SKHHP staff will determine if there are items
where the majority of cities align and where subregional coordination is required. Claire
Goodwin envisions that the points of alignment will be where SKHHP can provide coordination
and resources to support implementation.
Dana Ralph thanked SKHHP staff and planners for the work that went into the Preservation
Strategies. Each of the SKHHP cities has significant differences, and the idea that everyone
should do the same thing is not where SKHHP goes. Instead, the focus is on finding alignment
in the work we share across the region, building a stronger collaboration.
Sunaree Marshall appreciated the work and acknowledged that preservation has long been a
concern for South King County and SKHHP. She was excited to see the document's specific
nature and the collaborative effort that went into it.
Brian Davis appreciated Dana Ralph’s comments on the difference between jurisdictions and
the introductory statement, which allows flexibility by stating that jurisdictions can select what
policies and actions work best for their community. Brain Davis asked for clarification that when
the document says, “identify, monitor, or evaluate city actions” that it is in a city’s voice that
cities can choose and it’s not a SKHHP thing to evaluate and monitor. Claire Goodwin
confirmed that the voice of the goals, policies, and implementing action is in the city's voice and
that SKHHP would jump in where there was alignment across most cities, but SKHHP would not
monitor or oversee implementation.
VI. BOARD BUSINESS
a. 2025 SKHHP WORK PLAN & BUDGET
Claire Goodwin informed the Executive Board that they were in the final stretch of adopting the
2025 Work Plan and Budget per our Interlocal Agreement requirements. The final draft was
provided as part of the meeting agenda packet.
The process of developing the work plan started this year with a survey of the Executive and
Advisory Boards. SKHHP staff developed a draft work plan based on that information and
shared it with the Staff Work Group. The draft was revised based on feedback, and those
revisions were shared at last month's Executive Board meeting. The Executive Board provided
direction that they were comfortable with the draft and the proposed changes.
The Executive Board also provided direction on using the interest earnings accrued on the
capital funds towards the operating budget to allow for a cushion in future years should SKHHP
need it. The interest earnings have been incorporated into the budget, and there is an estimated
beginning and ending fund balance for next year in the 2025 draft budget reflecting that
addition.
Additional direction was provided that the Executive Board wanted to ensure that SKHHP
coordinated with the respective jurisdiction when a property owner of affordable housing
reaches out to SKHHP to connect to non-profits to potentially preserve the affordability. That
clarification has been included.
Finally, at the last meeting, there was a good discussion about adding a few action items to the
work plan. One stood out as an item of general interest and received five votes to support
adding it: Discuss how best to honor homelessness in SKHHP's work. Claire Goodwin inquired
about the opinions of the two board members absent at last month's meeting on whether to add
this item. Based on their answers, the Executive Board continued to have a split vote and
therefore it was not included in the work plan.
Claire Goodwin consulted with Chair Nancy Backus since the item continues to be brought up. It
is Claire Goodwin’s understanding that Chair Nancy Backus would like to bring forward a
conversation about homelessness over the summer and that the discussion will likely take place
in July or August.
Should the Executive Board adopt the 2025 Work Plan and Budget today, the next step will be
for the legislative bodies of each of your jurisdictions to adopt it. Due to Claire Goodwin's
maternity leave, the staff work group members will shepherd the Council materials and present
them to your Councils in her absence. SKHHP staff will develop the Council materials to inform
the legislative bodies on the 2025 Work Plan and Budget before her leave begins May 13.
Traci Buxton stated she was ambivalent about the topic of homelessness out of concerns for
staff capacity, but she appreciates that it will be discussed since it is in SKHHP’s name.
Dana Ralph added that it was very important to the Chair to wrangle what does it mean and how
is homelessness a part of the work we are doing while being aware we are a small, but mighty
team and there are other organizations doing the work, and it should be a good conversation.
Traci Buxton moved to adopt the 2025 Work Plan and Budget as read, seconded by Eric
Zimmerman. (11-0)
b. 2024 HOUSING CAPITAL FUND GUIDELINES
Claire Goodwin was excited to announce that SKHHP is entering its third annual funding round
of the Housing Capital Fund. SKHHP members pool resources from SHB 1406, HB 1590, and
the general fund for affordable housing construction and preservation/rehabilitation in South
King County. The Interlocal Agreements for pooling sales tax receipts to administer funds under
RCW 82.14.530 and RCW 82.14.540 require that for each funding round, the Executive Board
identify funding guidelines that include funding priorities, the amount available, eligible activities,
geographic areas, and more. The Executive Board adopts the funding guidelines every year and
makes minor adjustments. The finalized draft proposal for the 2024 Funding Guidelines and the
redline version were included in the meeting packet. Today's intent is to review the changes in
the draft and adopt the updated 2024 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines.
A few changes were made to the draft based on the feedback from the March meeting. The
funding priorities had language added to clarify they are in alphabetical order. Clarification was
also added to clarify the eligibility for homeownership projects serving up to 80% AMI dependent
on the adoption of any amendments to enabling legislation for SHB 1406 on eligible uses of
funds by some of the SKHHP partners. Language around the preservation priority was added to
include income-restricted properties. The Intent to Apply form is now required as part of the pre-
application meeting process so that all parties in the pre-application meeting can have the same
information. Language was also added related to the general funds available as part of the
funding round, allowing flexibility to determine the most effective use of the funds in relation to
project applications received.
Claire Goodwin prepared information based on the frequently asked questions by developers
relating to the SKHHP contracts and added it under the "Other Award Terms" section of the
guidelines. This content includes information about the reimbursement process, a 5% retention
held until the construction of a project is complete, and that SKHHP requires competitive bidding
and prevailing wages as part of our contracts. The application review process was also updated
to reflect last year's process. Jurisdiction staff were removed from the initial review of the
application, which was requested by the staff due to capacity concerns. Clarification was also
added that the recommendation process goes to the Advisory Board first and then the Executive
Board. A reference was removed asking a jurisdiction where a project is to be located who
hasn't contributed to the Housing Capital Fund to write a letter of support. This was based on
the experience of reviewing an application in unincorporated King County and understanding
that the County was supportive of the project based on their financially supporting that project.
Language elsewhere in the guidelines empowers a jurisdiction to notify SKHHP if a project is
not desired for their community.
Dana Ralph spoke on the language and the importance of hearing from a mayor or city
manager before a project proceeds too far down the development process. Cities should
maintain a step in the process before it becomes a broader conversation to prevent using funds
against the desires of a partner city. Claire Goodwin acknowledged the concern and that it was
discussed extensively during the drafting process of the 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines
and highlighted the language remaining in the draft guidelines, which states, "Staff from the
project location jurisdiction shall notify the respective SKHHP Executive Board Member and
administration of the applicant’s intent to apply and may consult with their legislative body on the
project proposal. Within two weeks of the pre-application meeting, a jurisdiction may submit a
statement on the project proposal to SKHHP staff as part of the project’s Housing Capital Fund
application. Should the jurisdiction not be supportive, the proposal shall not move forward for
consideration in the current funding cycle." Claire Goodwin confirmed that imposing a project on
a jurisdiction is not SKHHP's culture.
Traci Buxton stated that the language from 2023 addressed the concern but could have been
more substantial because it was addressed in other language in the guidelines. If that language
is to be removed, having a stronger version of the statement might make more sense. As the
discussion on homelessness and affordable housing morphs in our subregion, some unique or
interesting projects have come to a jurisdiction that the elected officials were not informed
about. The voice of the elected body should be protected as the touchpoint for the citizens, and
often, the staff is less connected to the community. The elected officials will ultimately bear the
brunt of any unaddressed concerns or needs in their community. Traci Buxton recommended
modifying the language,” “Staff from the project location jurisdiction shall notify the legislative
representative… “
Claire Goodwin responded that the language was flexible since King County is a partner and
notifying the County Council would be complex. Sunaree Marshall confirmed that the language
needed to be flexible as King County has its own internal process for handling project
notifications, and a requirement to notify the County Council would add challenges.
Colleen Brandt-Schluter asked where a typical project is when applying to the SKHHP fund
since SKHHP tends to be the last funder, so it might not be news to a city. Her experience with
the City of Burien projects in 2022 was that the projects were well-known to the city.
Dana Ralph responded that the city staff may often be aware of it, and the mayor usually knows
in a strong mayor form of government. In other forms of government, this may only sometimes
be the case, and there is a difference between the code and permit review that staff are
responsible for and the perspective of an elected official.
Traci Buxton responded to Colleen Brandt-Schluter that since SKHHP is not a primary funder,
alerting the elected officials may not be a priority like when SKHHP is the sole or primary funder.
As SKHHP grows and the funding process becomes standardized, ensuring that the elected
officials related to SKHHP continue to be informed about potential projects is essential. Using
the language "shall notify" would not require that a project be placed on a council agenda; just
ensure the elected officials are aware through a committee or department report.
Dana Ralph asked if adding "legislative or executive branch" would address the concern. In a
strong mayor form of government, the mayor would be notified, and in a council form, it would
be the city manager. Providing an update for the City of Kent would be an agenda item and may
create additional challenges.
Thomas McLeod asked if the two weeks provided to the jurisdiction to weigh in was enough
time to review and report on the project's details. Claire Goodwin responded that the process
described in the draft guidelines reflected the process from 2023. Pre-application meetings were
allowed until the application deadline, and SKHHP needed time to update the developer before
they submitted a complete application. It is helpful for the applicant to know sooner if there is a
concern or a city is not supportive of a project.
Thomas McLeod added that, like Kent, the City of Tukwila would have to put a project on the
agenda for discussion. Due to the meeting schedule of the Tukwila City Council, there is a
scenario where they would not be able to respond within the two-week deadline. Claire Goodwin
described the process from last year as a more direct conversation to identify any concerns a
city might have, and it didn't require formal council action. SKHHP attempted to design a less
administrative process, and projects with issues are often already on the radar of the elected
officials. Thomas McLeod responded that he felt it was important for his legislative body to
weigh in on a project. Dana Ralph replied that last year intended to ensure an elected official
was informed about a project rather than a formal process, which may add complexity.
Brian Davis stated that this was an essential issue for Federal Way and appreciated that the
conversation continues to evolve. He concurred that staff are not ultimately responsible as
representatives of a city and suggested adding a requirement to notify the city's chief executive,
which would address both styles of city government. He also wanted more time for review and
communication and suggested increasing the response time from two weeks to thirty days.
Sean Kelly added that for cities with a Council-Manager form of government, the notification
language should include the mayor or elected officials so that they can help keep the process
moving.
Eric Zimmerman agreed that requiring the mayor or city manager to be notified would mirror
similar notifications at the state and county level.
Claire Goodwin modified the language based on the feedback: "For projects located in cities,
SKHHP staff shall notify the Mayor and City Manager (if applicable) of the applicant’s intent to
apply. For projects located in unincorporated King County, SKHHP staff shall notify the County’s
SKHHP Board Member. Within thirty days of being notified, a jurisdiction may submit a
statement on the project proposal to SKHHP staff as part of the project’s Housing Capital Fund
application. Should the jurisdiction not be supportive, the proposal shall not move forward for
consideration in the current funding cycle.”
Claire Goodwin informed the Executive Board that between 2023 and 2024, SKHHP has pooled
over $10 million to support affordable housing in our region.
Traci Buxton moved to adopt the 2024 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines as read, seconded by
Sean Kelly. (11-0)
VII.UPDATES/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Claire Goodwin reminded the Board that this was her last Executive Board meeting until
October as she will be on maternity leave beginning May 13 and returning September 23. Jeff
Tate of the City of Auburn, who served as the SKHHP Manager before the role existed, will fill in
for Claire Goodwin during her absence. After May 13, don't hesitate to contact Jeff at
jtate@auburnwa.gov and Dorsol Plants, SKHHP Program Coordinator, at dplants@skhhp.org.
Claire Goodwin confirmed that Executive Board meetings would continue in her absence and
that there was a good outline of agenda topics and outside presentations over the summer
months. The "Meet the Developer" series will continue, and there will be other briefings based
on the topics requested by the Executive Board. The Program Coordinator has also been
working hard to organize an affordable housing tour for the September in-person meeting.
Logistics will be forthcoming, but the overall plan is to meet in Auburn and tour the SKHHP-
funded Habitat for Humanity homeownership project in Burien, then head to Victorian Place II in
Des Moines and hear from MSC on the work happening there, then go to the Sunset
Neighborhood in Renton and visit the Homestead Community Land Trust Willow Crest homes
and hear from Renton's planning staff on the neighborhood plan in that area. Several Advisory
Board members will be present on the tour as well.
Claire Goodwin stated that the only significant pause in work would be the contracting aspect of
the Housing Capital Fund and wanted to provide an update on the status of each contract.
Contracting for the Habitat for Humanity Burien homeownership project will occur in the next two
weeks, and contracting will close with Victorian Place II by May 1. Pacifica Law Group was hired
to assist in the development of contract and funding document templates, and an expenditure
related to this work will be reflected in the Q2 progress update and budget report.
Claire Goodwin informed the Executive Board that it had been brought to her attention that two
conferences conflict with our regularly scheduled June meeting on June 21. To avoid a lack of
quorum, Claire Goodwin suggested rescheduling it to June 14 from 1 PM-3 PM if that date
would work for most of the Board. This would likely be an in person meeting in Auburn as the
June 21 meeting was scheduled to be in person, and we only meet three times a year in person.
The Executive Board confirmed that June 14 would work for most of the Board in attendance.
Claire Goodwin extended hearty congratulations to Carmen Rivera, who is getting married
shortly and wished her all the best during this exciting time.
VIII. ADJOURN
Dana Ralph adjourned the meeting at 2:46 PM.
Program Coordinator-SKHHP