HomeMy WebLinkAbout06.16.23-Approved-SKHHP-EB-MinutesSKHHP Executive Meeting
June 16, 2023
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Nancy Backus called the meeting to order at 1:02 PM.
a. ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Executive Board members present:Nancy Backus, City of Auburn; Colleen Brandt-
Schluter, City of Burien; Kristina Soltys, City of Covington; Traci Buxton, City of Des
Moines; Brian Davis, City of Federal Way; Dana Ralph, City of Kent; Sean P. Kelly, City
of Maple Valley; Eric Zimmerman, City of Normandy Park; Ryan McIrvin, City of Renton;
Sunaree Marshall, King County; Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson, City of Tukwila.
Staff members present:Claire Goodwin, SKHHP; Dorsol Plants, SKHHP; Dafne
Hernandez, City of Covington; Merina Hanson, City of Kent; Hannah Bahnmiller, City of
Renton; McCaela Daffern, King County; Nicholas Matz, City of Normandy Park.
II.PUBLIC COMMENT
No member of the public requested time to address the Executive Board.
III. APPROVAL OF MAY 19, 2023 MINUTES
Kristina Soltys moved to approve the May 19, 2023 minutes as presented, seconded by
Dana Ralph. Motion passed (9-0)
IV.BOARD BUSINESS
a. In-Person Icebreaker
Executive Board members were asked to break into small groups and discuss the
question, “What is your favorite housing development and why?”
Nancy Backus highlighted the Trek Apartments across the street from Auburn City Hall.
The development broke ground roughly ten years ago and was the catalyst to revitalize
Auburn’s downtown. Approximately 500 beds were added with another 50 to open at
the end of the month.
b. 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines
Claire Goodwin brought a revised draft of the 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines, which
captures feedback from the Executive Board, Advisory Board, and SKHHP Staff Work
Group. At the May meeting, the Executive Board expressed a desire for the project location
jurisdiction to be able to weigh in on an application before the end of the process and for the
process to be formalized in the guidelines.
The current timeline for releasing the Housing Capital Fund Guidelines is July 24, 2023, and
materials will be distributed through the SKHHP website. Materials include an optional
Intent to Apply form due by August 7. Applicants are required to schedule a pre-application
meeting before the September 15 application deadline. Pre-application meetings will include
Staff from the Project Location Jurisdiction and SKHHP Staff. The pre-application meeting
aims to address any issues early in the application process.
Once the project is ready, they will complete the Combined Funders Application and the
SKHHP Application Addendum. Additionally, Applicants submit a Letter of Consistency and
a Letter of Community Support from the project location jurisdiction. The intention is for
SKHHP Staff, the Jurisdiction, and the applicant to be in constant contact throughout the
application process.
In response to the desire by the Executive Board at the May meeting, Claire Goodwin
prepared draft language that incorporated the Board’s concern that the project location
jurisdiction would not have a say in the funding decision early in the process. "City staff from
the project location jurisdiction shall notify the respective SKHHP Executive Board member
and administration of the applicant's intent to apply. They may consult with their legislative
body on the project proposal. Within two weeks of such notification, a statement may be
submitted on the project proposal to SKHHP staff as part of the project's Housing Capital
Fund application."
The purpose behind the revised language includes providing flexibility for each Jurisdiction
to determine if they want to comment on the project when located in their Jurisdiction. It also
will ensure that the SKHHP Board member and administration know the applicant's intent to
apply and provide the opportunity to communicate any concerns to City staff. SKHHP staff
can communicate feedback to the applicant before applying. This language avoids creating
additional requirements for an applicant and any phrasing that may discourage an applicant
from applying. Additionally, SKHHP staff will provide a template for the letter of consistency
to streamline the process for city staff. The requirement that all cities providing funding
submit letters of support at the end of the application process was removed.
Other revised language included the addition of a funding priority per the Advisory Board’s
recommendation. “Economic Opportunity: Projects that support the advancement of
economic opportunity are a high priority. This includes proximity to transit, commercial
cores, and connections to workforce development and other services that promote upward
mobility, including, but not limited to, childcare centers, higher education institutions, and
libraries.”
Traci Buxton asked if step one of the review process on page eight is separate from the
step outlined on page three, which is the Notice of Intent to Apply. Claire Goodwin stated
that the review process is how SKHHP Staff will review an application for completeness.
The Notice to Apply is optional, but a developer must schedule a pre-application meeting to
submit an application. City staff will be notified when SKHHP Staff is aware of the project.
Brian Davis asked for clarification that the language removed was to clarify that instead of
jurisdictions providing a letter of support at the end of the process, it was replaced with the
new proposed language earlier int eh process to allow the opportunity for the project
location jurisdiction to weight in. Claire Goodwin confirmed that was correct. Brian Davis
asked several clarifying questions which Claire Goodwin provided responses on.
Brian Davis asked further what would happen if the project location jurisdiction wrote a letter
that did not support the project and if that meant funding would not proceed. Claire Goodwin
stated that was the intent of the Executive Board, but explicit language was left out to not
discourage a developer from applying. Brian Davis stated that he would want stronger
language explicitly stating in the guidelines that if project location jurisdiction didn’t want a
project, the project wouldn’t proceed the application process.
Dana Ralph reinforced Brian Davis's position and expressed concern about what could
occur with future Executive Board’s if that language wasn’t made clearer.
Eric Zimmerman asked about loan terms on page six of the guidelines. Specifically, is there
a legal framework in Washington State and case law that exists on how to condition the
funds through a loan or grant and putting covenants on properties to ensure the long-term
affordability? Claire Goodwin stated that the Housing Capital Fund Guidelines were
developed as part of the process last year with close review by legal staff and with SKHHP
staff working closely with other funding organizations. Eric Zimmerman asked if covenants
have withstood the test of time in terms of maintaining the agreed to affordability. Claire
Goodwin said that covenants are a standard process by which funders ensure affordability
over the years. Sunaree Marshall added that King County has covenants on all its
affordable housing funding sources.
Traci Buxton moved to adopt the 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines, seconded by
Colleen Brandt-Schluter.
Dana Ralph spoke to the motion; SKHHP is a collaborative organization that brings
jurisdictions together. We have all come together to support Affordable Housing, and we
can't do it at the expense of another jurisdiction.
Sunaree Marshall spoke to the language in the motion, seeking to have the word changed
to Jurisdiction to include King County. Additionally, language was vague around who could
submit a statement, and it should be clear that it is from a Jurisdiction. Finally, language
should include space for jurisdictions to work with the developer to meet consistency with
the Jurisdiction.
Traci Buxton amended the motion to include, “Within two weeks of such notification, a
statement may be submitted on the project proposal to SKHHP staff as part of the project’s
Housing Capital Fund application, and the Executive Board will honor any preferences
expressed in a submitted statement, or a jurisdictional statement." Claire Goodwin
responded that the developer should not complete the application if SKHHP Staff had a
letter from the project location jurisdiction that was against the project. Traci Buxton clarified
that the language was chosen to prevent developers from being discouraged by avoiding
the word 'refusal' or 'rejected.'
Dana Ralph added that there is a difference between a project meeting the criteria through
a jurisdiction's planning process and the Jurisdiction itself providing funding to a project.
Kristina Soltys spoke to the motion, stating that Covington is entering discussions
around including their HB 1590 funds into the Housing Capital Fund, and there is a
need to consider the community when considering projects. Projects will differ, and
because the Jurisdiction has rejected one project does not mean they would be against
all future projects. Jurisdictions should be empowered to favor a project better suited to
their community than another project.
Eric Zimmerman spoke to the motion. From the perspective of SKHHP being a long-
term organization, the question should be asked what will keep jurisdictions at the
table? Trust must be built between jurisdictions so that anything done together would be
together. Requiring unanimity or providing the project location jurisdiction a veto on a
project undesired in the community would be a step toward securing that trust.
Additionally, a developer likely to apply for the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund would not
be discouraged by this language due to the size of the project and their experience.
Claire Goodwin spoke to tabling the discussion to give SKHHP Staff time to refine the
language. Nancy Backus asked the Executive Board their opinion on tabling. Kristina
Soltys spoke in support of tabling to ensure the correct language was produced.
Sunaree Marshall mentioned that if the guidelines would need to be amended in July to
include SHB 1590 funds, there was no need to pass the motion today. Claire Goodwin
added that there would be an advantage to coming to a decision today in order to focus
on the revised draft that incorporates HB 1590 revenue at the July meeting.
Claire Goodwin put forward the amended language, “City 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 such notification, a statement may be
submitted on the project proposal to SKHHP staff as part of the project’s Housing
Capital Fund application, and should the Jurisdiction not be supportive, SKHHP staff will
inform the applicant and that proposal will not be considered."
Dana Ralph put forward a slightly modified version of the previous statement," City 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 such notification, a
statement may be submitted 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.”
Ryan McIrvin asked if it was implied or should be included that a jurisdiction may be
against a project in this funding round only, and not future funding rounds. However, the
applicant should be encouraged to apply if the project better aligns with the Jurisdiction.
He suggested adding language that included,” … the proposal shall not move forward
for consideration in the current funding cycle.”
Colleen Brandt-Schluter added that Burien had recent experience as the Project
Location Jurisdiction of all three 2022 Housing Capital Fund applicants. All three
projects were well known to the city staff and government when applying for SKHHP
funding. Many processes have been met when a project reaches the SKHHP funding
request point. It's essential to place the SKHHP process in the context of the significant
process both the Jurisdiction and the developer have undertaken before applying for the
SKHHP Capital Fund.
Dana Ralph responded that the development planning and approval process differs
from providing funding to support the project. She would not want to use Kent funding to
force a project on another jurisdiction that they wouldn’t want.
Nancy Backus added that the goal is to fund projects the entire SKHHP Board supports.
Claire Goodwin expressed support for the current amended language and believes the
language encompasses the variety of city governments inside SKHHP. The language
will lead to the SKHHP Board member and Jurisdiction being notified. Changing it to
elected leadership would pose challenges. By alerting the City Manager, they can
decide if it needs to be elevated to the Mayor or City Council.
Traci Buxton asked if jurisdictions who care deeply about this process need to ensure
an Elected Official serves as the Executive Board member.
Colleen Brandt-Schluter expressed that a staff person serving as an SKHHP Executive
Board member may be more likely to notify their elected officials about incoming
projects to their Jurisdiction.
Brian Davis asked if the Jurisdiction has two weeks to provide a letter, when does that
start, and who is driving the clock to ensure a response? He suggested tying the two
weeks to the date of the pre-application meeting. Claire Goodwin responded with a
concern that some pre-application meetings may occur late in the process and wants to
ensure enough time for interested applicants to hear any concerns before the
September 15 deadline. Her goal would be that as soon as SKHHP staff becomes
aware of the interest, Staff will communicate with the Executive Board member and
administration while scheduling the pre-application meeting. Brian Davis responded that
the current draft language makes the developer and SKHHP Staff dependent on the city
without the ability to drive a response.
Nancy Backus asked how the situation would be handled if SKHHP received notification
of the application but could not respond within two weeks of receiving a note of interest.
Language should be clear when the two-week period begins, possibly upon notification
to SKHHP staff.
Brain Davis stated that SKHHP should define and control time zero and the deadline.
He asked for clarification why the pre-application meeting does not work as the start of
the two weeks.
Nancy Backus answered that if the pre-application meeting were the start of the period,
all pre-application meetings would have to be held by September 1.
In response to the discussion, the language was amended, “City 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
statement may be submitted 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.”
Brian Davis moved to amend the language around the pre-application meeting in the
Housing Capital Fund Guidelines to read, "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", seconded by Ryan
McIrvin. Motion passed (11-0)
Motion passed to adopt Housing Capital Fund Guidelines as amended. (11-0)
c. POOLING HB 1590 REVENUE
Claire Goodwin opened the discussion on pooling HB 1590 revenue by providing
background information related to the legislation. HB 1590 was passed by the state
legislature in 2020 and authorized jurisdictions to impose 0.1% local sales and use tax
to support affordable housing, behavioral health facilities, and related supportive
services. Jurisdictions had a limited window to collect tax revenue before King County
could collect the revenue. Four SKHHP jurisdictions collect HB 1590 funds, including
Covington, Kent, Maple Valley, and Renton.
RCW 82.14.530 specifies that at least 60% of funds collected must fund: constructing or
acquiring affordable housing; constructing or acquiring behavioral health-related
facilities or acquiring land for these purposes; funding the operations and maintenance
costs of new units of affordable housing. Funds must support households earning up to
60% AMI from specific populations: Persons with behavioral health disabilities,
veterans, seniors, the homeless or people at risk of homelessness, unaccompanied
homeless youth, persons with disabilities, and domestic violence survivors. King County
uses HB 1590 revenue to fund the Health Through Housing program.
Claire Goodwin updated the Executive Board that preliminary conversations had
occurred with SKHHP jurisdictions collecting HB 1590 funds, with each Jurisdiction
being in a different place. Covington has had conversations with SKHHP previously
about using HB 1590 funds, with SKHHP Staff presenting on the topic to the Covington
City Council June 13, 2023. While no formal action has been taken, Covington will
consider pooling 50% of the 60% of the Capital portion of HB 1590. Kristina Soltys
added that this item is scheduled to go before the Covington City Council in July, hoping
that funds can be added to the 2023 Housing Capital Fund round.
Claire Goodwin let the Board know that the City of Kent had taken legislative action in
prior years and is committed to pooling 100% of the 60% Capital portion.
Maple Valley has not had conversations at the Council level but will likely pool some HB
1590 funds.
Renton may pool with SKHHP in future years, but is still discussing other opportunities
such as with the Renton Housing Authority.
Based on current conversations, adding HB 1590 funds could bring the 2023 Housing
Capital Fund an additional $4.85 million. If Covington and Kent contributed HB 1590
funds, it would add an additional $2.4 million annually.
Sean P. Kelly added that the discussion of pooling HB 1590 funds is on the Maple
Valley City Council agenda for July 10.
Claire Goodwin asked the Executive Board if they supported SKHHP staff undertaking
the work to incorporate HB 1590 funds into the adopted 2023 Housing Capital Fund
Guidelines. The additional funds would be used to acquire and construct affordable
housing. The Executive Board strongly supported including HB 1590 funds in the 2023
Housing Capital Fund.
d. LONG-TERM FUNDING STRATEGY FOR HOUSING CAPITAL FUND
Claire Goodwin sought feedback from the Executive Board on developing long-term
funding strategies for the Housing Capital Fund. Developing long-term funding
strategies was the top priority for the Executive Board during the drafting of the 2024
Work Plan and is included on the 2023 Work Plan as a ‘critical item’: “Develop a long-
term funding strategy for the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund and facilitate conversations
with member jurisdictions to identify and explore dedicated sources of revenue for
affordable housing at the local and regional level.” The Executive Board split into small
working groups to discuss what developing a long-term funding strategy means for
them. SKHHP Staff Work Group members were asked to join the small groups to take
discussion notes. As part of the agenda packet, an inventory of potential sources of
revenue was included and the groups were asked to discuss which options their
jurisdictions might support and which ones they likely wouldn’t support.
Claire Goodwin asked for the groups to provide an update on their conversation.
Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson stated that her group had potentially identified two funding
sources not currently being used. The first is philanthropic opportunities and creating
communication strategies to develop those partnerships. The second is working
together to seek funding from the state and federal delegations. There was some
concern about the impact other options might have on the current state of affordability
for housing.
Claire Goodwin collected notes from the small groups for future discussion.
e. SKHHP ADVISORY BOARD RECRUITMENT
Dorsol Plants provided an update on the planned summer recruitment drive for the SKHHP
Advisory Board. The Advisory Board consists of twelve to fifteen community members or
organizations dedicated to developing and preserving affordable housing. The Advisory
Board has ten active members, including five community members and five organizations.
The purpose of the recruitment drive starting on June 19 is to fill the five vacant positions.
As part of the recruitment, SKHHP staff identified categories of knowledge and experience
that are limited or not present among the current makeup of the Advisory Board. These
included perspectives from housing developers, landlords, philanthropic organizations, and
people currently residing in affordable housing. Materials have been prepared to help
spread the word about the Advisory Board recruitment.
V. UPDATES/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Claire Goodwin announced she would be on vacation from August 21 to Sept 4. A coverage
plan will be developed.
VI. ADJOURN
Nancy Backus adjourned the meeting at 3:00 PM
Program Coordinator-SKHHP
Rebecca Gobeille
General Counsel &
Chief Compliance Officer
500 Naches Ave SW, Ste. 200
Renton, WA 98057
(206) 895.5244
becca.gobeille@habitatskc.org
TO: SKHHP Executive Board
FROM: Habitat for Humanity Seattle-King County
DATE: May 25, 2023
RE: Burien Phase I Financing and Affordability Guidelines
As requested, this memo is to serve as a summary of awards and funding for the first
phase of development of the Habitat Burien Project (described below) and the relevant
affordability requirements associated with each of those awards. Funding for the Project
currently includes funds from the Washington Department of Commerce Housing Trust Fund
(“HTF”), HOME funds through King County (“HOME”) and CHIP funds through King County
(“CHIP”). The following is a basic timeline of awards and closings:
• 05/21/20 ---- Application to the City of Burien for the Demonstration Program
• 11/17/20 ---- MOU signed by the City of Burien and HFHSKC
• 12/24/22 ---- King County HOME Funding Awarded
• 02/04/22 ---- HTF Funding for Phase I Awarded
• 05/16/22 ---- Affordable Housing Covenant signed with City of Burien
• 09/06/22 ---- Letter of Consistency Received from City of Burien
• 09/13/22 ---- Application Submitted to SKHHP
• 12/30/22 ---- Contracts for HOME and HTF - Phase I (including CHIP) executed
• 01/13/23 ---- Closing of HOME and HTF - Phase I Funding (including CHIP)
• 01/13/23 ---- Award Letter Received from SKHHP for Phase I Funding
On November 4, 2019, Burien adopted Ordinance 718, enacting an Affordable Housing
Demonstration Program for development of a limited number of affordable housing projects
within the City of Burien as demonstration projects. In 2020, Habitat applied for and was granted
approval to construct 40 affordable townhome units as part of a demonstration project at 511
South 136th Street in the City of Burien ("Project"). The Demonstration Program requires that
the Affordable Housing Covenant with the City of Burien specify that the household gross
income for all the purchasers at the Project may not exceed, on average, 50% of King County
AMI, but that no individual household’s gross income may exceed 80% AMI. The Affordable
Housing Covenant has been recorded against the Project and does not have any funds connected
to it.
In October, 2022, the Burien City Council considered a motion to increase the income
restrictions for the Demonstration Program to 60% AMI, among other changes. Ultimately, the
council decided to extend the term of the Affordable Housing Demonstration Program, but not to
increase the income restrictions to 60%. As a result, the restriction for homeownership units
developed under the program remains at “may not exceed, on average, 50% of King County
AMI”. I also note that there is some inconsistency between the City of Burien documents and the
guidelines published on the City website – on certain pages the AMI restriction is shown as a
maximum of 50% AMI (rather than “on average”). I was able to confirm with the City of Burien
that the restrictions set out in the recorded Affordable Housing Covenant will control for the
Project.
Once approved by the Burien Demonstration Program, Habitat applied for funds from
HTF, HOME and CHIP. Both the HTF and HOME funds will be utilized for construction of the
Project. CHIP funds are limited in their use to infrastructure planning and construction. The only
funding with requirements other than obtaining homebuyers with gross incomes of an average of
50% AMI is the HOME funds, which require that each affected unit be subject to a recorded
HOME Program Use Agreement with options to purchase in a form approved by King County.
Each of the affected five units shall be subject to an affordability period of fifty years consisting
of 15 years under the HOME Program and an additional 35 years thereafter required by the
County. This term matches that of the affordability requirements under both the City of Burien
affordable housing covenant and the HTF loan documents.
Based on the collective requirements set out by these various programs, Phase I units
may only be sold to households with gross incomes which shall not exceed an average of 50%
AMI across the Phase 1 units, but under no circumstances may an individual household's gross
income exceed 80% AMI. Regardless of the maximum AMI set out in the Phase I loan
documents and considering the constraints related to maintaining an average gross income of
50% AMI across the Phase I purchasers, Habitat is committed to ensuring that the household
gross income for all Phase I purchasers is restricted to up to 60% AMI. Please let us know if
there is additional information you require or if you have any questions or need additional
clarification. Thank you.
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 1 of 12
SOUTH KING HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS PARTNERS
Housing Capital Fund – 2023 Funding Guidelines
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The Cities of Auburn, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Federal Way, Kent, Maple Valley, Normandy Park,
Renton, and Tukwila, and King County have entered into an interlocal agreement to cooperatively plan
for and provide affordable housing in South King County through an organization called the South King
Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP). To accomplish this, SKHHP member cities provide
funding to affordable housing projects through the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund.
SKHHP welcomes all groups or agencies considering preserving or adding to inventory of affordable
housing available to low-income households. We encourage interested parties to contact SKHHP as
early in the process as possible. SKHHP welcomes all inquiries, and our goal is to help project
proponents connect to partners and leverage funding to move forward in as coordinated an approach
as possible. The general purpose of the Housing Capital Fund is to create and preserve affordable
housing that meets the needs of low-income households earning up to 60% of area median income.
AVAILABLE FUNDING
Approximately $1.06 million in total funding is anticipated to be available for the 2023 application
round. This total is comprised of local funds from sales tax revenue authorized by Substitute House Bill
(SHB) 1406, RCW 82.14.540.
FUNDING PRIORITIES
SKHHP has established the following priorities for the Housing Capital Fund in 2023:
Collaboration. Project sponsors working in collaboration/partnership with local community-based
organizations are a high priority.
Community Connections and Engagement. Project sponsors that demonstrate connections and direct
experience with populations they are proposing to serve, and proven success in community
engagement and involvement in decision-making are a high priority.
Disproportionate Impact. Projects that ensure housing proactively meets the needs of and is available
to populations most disproportionately impacted by housing costs while complying with relevant
federal, state, and local fair housing laws.
Economic Opportunity. Projects that support the advancement of economic opportunity are a high
priority. This includes proximity to transit, commercial cores, and connections to workforce
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 2 of 12
development and other services that promote upward mobility, including, but not limited to child care
centers, higher education institutions, and libraries.
Extremely Low Income and Supportive Housing. Proposals that provide rental housing for individuals
and families earning 0-30% AMI and proposals that incorporate supportive services are a high priority.
Geographic Equity. The SKHHP Housing Capital Fund has a long term objective to produce housing
across SKHHP member jurisdictions through the creation of a broad distribution in the location of all
types of affordable housing over time to maximize choice for individuals and families seeking
affordable homes within SKHHP’s geographic purview.
Homeownership. Projects that are able to provide homeownership opportunities for individuals and
families earning up to 60% AMI.
Leverage of Private and Public Investment. SKHHP encourages project sponsors to pursue private and
public investment that provides maximum leverage of local resources. Projects that already have
funding secured and/or leverage private and public investment are a high priority.
Preservation. Projects that preserve housing at risk of conversion to market-rate housing are a high
priority. This includes housing units with expiring affordability requirements or preservation of
residential rental properties that are affordable to households earning 60% AMI, but do not have
affordability requirements.
Racial Equity. SKHHP encourages proposals that advance racial equity through strategies that
intentionally dismantle the racially disparate impacts of our current housing system and that interrupts
cyclical generational poverty. Strategies may include, but are not limited to: preserving communities at
risk of displacement; creating project partnerships that give voice and ownership to communities of
color; affirmatively marketing new housing opportunities to populations disproportionately
experiencing cost burden and housing insecurity; and addressing historic inequities in access to
homeownership.
Transit-Oriented Development. Projects located within ½ mile of an existing or planned high capacity
transit station, defined as fixed rail (light rail or Sounder train), bus rapid transit, or other high
frequency bus stop are a high priority. Transit-oriented development is designed to support dense,
walkable communities that increase access to employment, services, and other opportunities.
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 3 of 12
SCHEDULE
The following schedule is anticipated for the 2023 Housing Capital Fund application round:
July 2023 Application package available
By August 7, 2023 Provide intent to apply statement (optional)
Prior to application submittal Pre-funding application meeting (mandatory)
NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPLY
Proponents of affordable housing projects within South King County who are planning a development
and are interested in benefitting from coordinated funding are asked to submit a notice of intent to
apply. Notice of intent forms are optional, but strongly encouraged and are due by Monday, August
7, 2023. Please submit your intent to apply as early as possible. A pre-application meeting is required
in order to be eligible to apply to the funding round.
PRE-APPLICATION MEETING
Applicants are required to schedule a Pre-Funding Application Meeting to identify and discuss
potential issues prior to submitting an application for funding. Pre-Funding Application Meetings will
include SKHHP staff as well as staff from the jurisdiction where the project is proposed to be located.
First-time applicants will benefit from meeting early and often with SKHHP. Applicants should be
prepared to provide a project description identifying the population to be served, approximate number
of units, income and affordability, type of construction (rehabilitation or new), neighborhood issues,
whether relocation or displacement will be required, team members (developer, architect, property
manager), likely funding sources, and demonstration of how the proposed project meets SKHHP’s goals
and priorities.
City 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 such notification, a statement may be submitted on the project proposal to
SKHHP staff as part of the project’s Housing Capital Fund application.
Pre-Funding Application Meetings will likely be held between July 31 and August 18, 2023. To set up
a Pre-Funding Application Meeting, email Dorsol Plants at dplants@skhhp.org.
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 4 of 12
ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS
Housing Capital Funds may be applied for by applicants or a group of applicants that are:
• Non-profit organizations
• Private for-profit organizations
• Public housing authorities
• Public development authorities
• Units of local government
Partnerships involving combinations of the above groups are encouraged, especially in the case where
a private for-profit organization and/or applicants with less experience looking to build affordable
housing development skills and abilities applies for funding. Partnerships are seen as opportunities to
build organizational capacity, achieve community outcomes, and reduce investment risk for Housing
Capital Funds.
ELIGIBLE BENEFICIARIES
The general purpose of the Housing Capital Fund is to create and preserve affordable housing that
meets the needs of low-income households earning up to 60% of area median income. SKHHP uses the
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development income limits and rent limits developed
for the Seattle-Bellevue Metro Area.
2023 Income and Rent Limits – King County Area Median Income $146,500
Maximum 2023 Household Income for Multifamily Rental Properties 1
$19,180 $21,920 $24,660 $27,400 $29,600 $31,800 $33,980 $36,180
$28,800 $32,900 $37,000 $41,100 $44,400 $47,700 $51,000 $54,300
$33,565 $38,360 $43,155 $47,950 $51,800 $55,650 $59,465 $63,315
$38,360 $43,840 $49,320 $54,800 $59,200 $63,600 $67,960 $72,360
$43,155 $49,320 $55,485 $61,650 $66,600 $71,550 $76,455 $81,405
$47,950 $54,800 $61,650 $68,500 $74,000 $79,500 $84,950 $90,450
$57,540 $65,760 $73,980 $82,200 $88,800 $95,400 $101,940 $108,540
1 https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/mtsp.html and https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il23/Section8-
IncomeLimits-FY23.pdf
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 5 of 12
Maximum Rent and Utilities for Projects Based on Unit Size
$479 $513 $616 $712 $795 $877
$720 $771 $925 $1,068 $1,192 $1,316
$839 $899 $1,078 $1,246 $1,391 $1,534
$959 $1,027 $1,233 $1,425 $1,590 $1,754
$1,078 $1,155 $1,387 $1,603 $1,788 $1,973
$1,198 $1,284 $1,541 $1,781 $1,987 $2,192
$1,438 $1,541 $1,849 $2,137 $2,385 $2,631
Maximum rent and utilities for projects based on unit size includes the cost of basic utilities paid by resident.
Unless the property pays ALL utilities, property must allow for the estimated amount the resident pays for
utilities when calculating rent charges, so that both together do not exceed the rent limits. Most properties use
public housing authority utility allowances. King County Housing Authority energy assistance supplements
(formerly called utility allowances).
ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES
SKHHP funds may be used for the following activities:
• Acquisition, and related costs such as appraisals, financing costs, and transaction costs
• Rehabilitation and new construction costs, including construction site development and off-site
development if necessary to ensure utility service to the project site
• Mixed-income projects so long as Housing Capital Fund dollars only assist units affordable at or
below 60% of area median income
At this time, SKHHP does not have funds to support early technical assistance or predevelopment
costs. Applicants in very preliminary stages are encouraged to apply to Impact Capital for
predevelopment funding.
SKHHP member cities understand that certain County, State, and Federal housing programs require
some level of matching by local resources. The SKHHP Housing Capital Fund is encouraged to be used
as a local match for these programs.
INELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES
Housing Capital Funds may NOT be used for:
The development of any non-residential use. Housing capital funds may be used in a mixed use
development only for that portion of the development that is specific to the residential use. This
restriction also applies to site development and off-site development costs for non-residential uses.
• The cost of any program operating expenses
• The cost of any political or lobbying activities or materials
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 6 of 12
• Rehabilitation of single-family housing units in a manner that would duplicate participating
jurisdictions’ housing repair assistance programs
• Uses that are public capital facilities such as correctional facilities or impatient treatment
facilities
PROJECT LOCATION
All projects funded under this program must be located within the SKHHP sphere of influence (see
ATTACHMENT A).
LOAN AND REGULATORY TERMS
Housing Capital Fund dollars will be made available as either secured grants or loans. SKHHP has
flexible terms designed to accommodate a range of projects and loan terms will vary based on the
financial needs of the project. Applicants should indicate in the application whether they are applying
for a grant or loan, and what loan terms are proposed for the project. Loan applicants will not receive
priority over grant applicants.
PERIOD OF AFFORDABILITY
SKHHP expects that projects will commit to providing long-term affordability in the form of a 50-year
regulatory agreement. A covenant will be recorded against the property that requires continued use of
the property for low-income housing for the period of affordability. During this period the owner or
property manager will be required to do annual reporting of tenant incomes and rents to ensure that
affordability requirements are met, and SKHHP will monitor those reports to ensure compliance. If the
project is converted to an alternative use or is otherwise not meeting the agreed upon terms in the
regulatory agreement any time during the project’s agreed-to term of affordability, the SKHHP Housing
Capital Fund contribution to the project will be subject to immediate repayment, and potentially a
proportionate share of appreciation.
OTHER AWARD TERMS/REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Additional funding conditions will be spelled out in an award letter to successful applicants. At a
minimum, the following reporting requirements shall apply during development and occupancy:
Quarterly Status Reports
Quarterly status reports are required from all Housing Capital Fund funded projects during the
development stage (from the time funds are awarded until completion and occupancy of the project).
The quarterly reports will minimally include the status of funds expended and progress to date. A final
budget must be prepared and submitted at the time of construction start and project completion.
SKHHP will rely on the quarterly reports to determine if satisfactory progress is being made on the
project. Additionally, SKHHP staff will inspect the project site at least once during the
development/construction stage.
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 7 of 12
Ongoing Monitoring
After occupancy, the project sponsor or manager will submit an annual report to SKHHP summarizing
the number of project beneficiaries, housing expenses for the target population, and the proportion of
those beneficiaries that are low- and/or moderate-income, and that meet other eligibility criteria
established in the SKHHP regulatory agreement. In addition, for projects with loan payments, financial
information must be reported annually which will be used for assessing contingent loan payments and
project health. All projects will also be evaluated periodically for long term sustainability. The annual
reports will be required for the full duration of affordability.
APPLICATION CONTENTS
SKHHP uses the Combined Funders Application forms, developed jointly with other public funders
including the State of Washington Department of Commerce and King County. The Combined Funders
Application forms, SKHHP application addendum, and SKHHP notice of intent to apply are available on
SKHHP’s website at: http://skhhp.org/home/housing-capital-fund/
Letter of consistency
Projects that are selected for funding have to demonstrate consistency with community priorities and
plans. Applicants must include a letter of consistency from the jurisdiction where the project is located
affirming the project is consistent with the Consolidated Plan, local comprehensive plan, and its
housing element, and any local housing action plans. The jurisdiction will be provided a template from
SKHHP which can be used to provide the needed information to the applicant.
Letter of community support
Projects that are selected for funding must demonstrate community support. Applicants must include
at least one letter of support from a community organization, faith-based institution, community
center, or school that serves the community where the project is proposed to be located.
The following materials are to be submitted for each application:
One complete electronic application on a flash drive that includes:
1. A letter of consistency from the jurisdiction where the project is proposed (PDF format)
2. A letter of community support (PDF format)
3. SKHHP Addendum with narrative responses in Word format
4. Combined Funders Application that meets the following:
o Attachments under each Tab should be placed in a separate folder labeled with the Tab
number.
o The Project Workbook must be in Excel format with linked sheets unlocked and
formulas visible.
Commented [CVG1]: Will need to update link once
available
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 8 of 12
Complete applications are to be submitted by 5:00 pm on September 15, 2023 to:
SKHHP
ATTN: Claire Vanessa Goodwin
25 W. Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001
If you are delivering in person, please reach out to SKHHP staff in advance to confirm a time for
application delivery. If you have any questions about application requirements, please contact Claire
Vanessa Goodwin at (253) 931-3042 or email cvgoodwin@skhhp.org.
REVIEW PROCESS
Proposals will be reviewed using the following process:
Step 1. An initial screening will be conducted by SKHHP staff and staff of the jurisdiction where the
project is proposed to be located to determine the completeness of each application. Staff reserves the
right to deny applications that are incomplete.
Step 2. SKHHP will evaluate the applications and develop a recommendation to the respective City
Councils. SKHHP’s recommendation will be made by its Advisory Board and approved by its Executive
Board.
Step 3. SKHHP member City Councils that have contributed funding will review and approve the
funding recommendation submitted by SKHHP, or will return the recommendation, with comments,
for further investigation before a final decision is made. SKHHP member jurisdictions where the project
is proposed to be located that have NOT contributed funding to the project via the SKHHP Housing
Capital Fund will be asked for a letter of support prior to a final funding decision being made.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
General
Evaluation of applications will focus on an overall evaluation of all of the following key areas:
• 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.
• Feasibility, timeliness, and cost effectiveness (i.e., SKHHP Housing Capital Fund award per
unit/square feet, total development cost per unit/square feet, reasonableness of schedule,
budgets, and proforma, adequacy of resources and ongoing sustainability, and site control
to ensure timely completion).
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 9 of 12
• Relevance of the project to local housing needs and funding priorities, 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.
• Suitability of the project sponsor and development team, including any track record
and/or housing development 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.
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. Higher land costs may be justified to account for strategic location such as proximity to
transit or other local amenities. SKHHP may use third party 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. 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, including a plan and
timeline for the proposed capital fundraising and, preferably, a track record of past or current capital
fundraising ability. Projects that will rely on public funding to cover the costs of ongoing operations or
services should identify and describe the availability of such funding, and report on the project’s
competitiveness for such funds based on discussions with likely funders.
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
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 10 of 12
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:
• 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.
• Facility: The facility management plan should include provisions for both routine and long-
term building maintenance.
• 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 to discuss what relocation assistance may be
available. Relocation costs should be included in the project budget. Projects funded with federal
dollars (e.g., CDBG funds) must meet all applicable federal relocation requirements.
F. Supporting Equity
The proposed project will be evaluated based on whether the development will advance SKHHP’s goals
of equity, including preserving existing communities at risk of displacement (which includes
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
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 11 of 12
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.
• Investing public dollars in areas traditionally/historically underserved or as a catalyst for further
investments and development.
DRAFT
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 12 of 12
ATTACHMENT A: SKHHP SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 1 of 12
SOUTH KING HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS PARTNERS
Housing Capital Fund – 2023 Funding Guidelines
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The Cities of Auburn, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Federal Way, Kent, Maple Valley, Normandy Park,
Renton, and Tukwila, and King County have entered into an interlocal agreement to cooperatively plan
for and provide affordable housing in South King County through an organization called the South King
Housing and Homelessness Partners (SKHHP). To accomplish this, SKHHP member cities provide
funding to affordable housing projects through the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund.
SKHHP welcomes all groups or agencies considering preserving or adding to inventory of affordable
housing available to low-income households. We encourage interested parties to contact SKHHP as
early in the process as possible. SKHHP welcomes all inquiries, and our goal is to help project
proponents connect to partners and leverage funding to move forward in as coordinated an approach
as possible. The general purpose of the Housing Capital Fund is to create and preserve affordable
housing that meets the needs of low-income households earning up to 60% of area median income.
AVAILABLE FUNDING
Approximately $1.06 million in total funding is anticipated to be available for the 2023 application
round. This total is comprised of local funds from sales tax revenue authorized by Substitute House Bill
(SHB) 1406, RCW 82.14.540.
FUNDING PRIORITIES
SKHHP has established the following priorities for the Housing Capital Fund in 2023:
Collaboration. Project sponsors working in collaboration/partnership with local community-based
organizations are a high priority.
Community Connections and Engagement. Project sponsors that demonstrate connections and direct
experience with populations they are proposing to serve, and proven success in community
engagement and involvement in decision-making are a high priority.
Disproportionate Impact. Projects that ensure housing proactively meets the needs of and is available
to populations most disproportionately impacted by housing costs while complying with relevant
federal, state, and local fair housing laws.
Economic Opportunity. Projects that support the advancement of economic opportunity are a high
priority. This includes proximity to transit, commercial cores, and connections to workforce
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 2 of 12
development and other services that promote upward mobility, including, but not limited to child care
centers, higher education institutions, and libraries.
Extremely Low Income and Supportive Housing. Proposals that provide rental housing for individuals
and families earning 0-30% AMI and proposals that incorporate supportive services are a high priority.
Geographic Equity. The SKHHP Housing Capital Fund has a long term objective to produce housing
across SKHHP member jurisdictions through the creation of a broad distribution in the location of all
types of affordable housing over time to maximize choice for individuals and families seeking
affordable homes within SKHHP’s geographic purview.
Homeownership. Projects that are able to provide homeownership opportunities for individuals and
families earning up to 60% AMI.
Leverage of Private and Public Investment. SKHHP encourages project sponsors to pursue private and
public investment that provides maximum leverage of local resources. Projects that already have
funding secured and/or leverage private and public investment are a high priority.
Preservation. Projects that preserve housing at risk of conversion to market-rate housing are a high
priority. This includes housing units with expiring affordability requirements or preservation of
residential rental properties that are affordable to households earning 60% AMI, but do not have
affordability requirements.
Racial Equity. SKHHP encourages proposals that advance racial equity through strategies that
intentionally dismantle the racially disparate impacts of our current housing system and that interrupts
cyclical generational poverty. Strategies may include, but are not limited to: preserving communities at
risk of displacement; creating project partnerships that give voice and ownership to communities of
color; affirmatively marketing new housing opportunities to populations disproportionately
experiencing cost burden and housing insecurity; and addressing historic inequities in access to
homeownership.
Transit-Oriented Development. Projects located within ½ mile of an existing or planned high capacity
transit station, defined as fixed rail (light rail or Sounder train), bus rapid transit, or other high
frequency bus stop are a high priority. Transit-oriented development is designed to support dense,
walkable communities that increase access to employment, services, and other opportunities.
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 3 of 12
SCHEDULE
The following schedule is anticipated for the 2023 Housing Capital Fund application round:
July 2023 Application package available
By August 7, 2023 Provide intent to apply statement (optional)
Prior to application submittal Pre-funding application meeting (mandatory)
NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPLY
Proponents of affordable housing projects within South King County who are planning a development
and are interested in benefitting from coordinated funding are asked to submit a notice of intent to
apply. Notice of intent forms are optional, but strongly encouraged and are due by Monday, August
7, 2023. Please submit your intent to apply as early as possible. A pre-application meeting is required
in order to be eligible to apply to the funding round.
PRE-APPLICATION MEETING
Applicants are required to schedule a Pre-Funding Application Meeting to identify and discuss
potential issues prior to submitting an application for funding. Pre-Funding Application Meetings will
include SKHHP staff as well as staff from the jurisdiction where the project is proposed to be located.
First-time applicants will benefit from meeting early and often with SKHHP. Applicants should be
prepared to provide a project description identifying the population to be served, approximate number
of units, income and affordability, type of construction (rehabilitation or new), neighborhood issues,
whether relocation or displacement will be required, team members (developer, architect, property
manager), likely funding sources, and demonstration of how the proposed project meets SKHHP’s goals
and priorities.
City 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 such notification, a statement may be submitted on the project proposal to
SKHHP staff as part of the project’s Housing Capital Fund application.
Pre-Funding Application Meetings will likely be held between July 31 and August 18, 2023. To set up
a Pre-Funding Application Meeting, email Dorsol Plants at dplants@skhhp.org.
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 4 of 12
ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS
Housing Capital Funds may be applied for by applicants or a group of applicants that are:
• Non-profit organizations
• Private for-profit organizations
• Public housing authorities
• Public development authorities
• Units of local government
Partnerships involving combinations of the above groups are encouraged, especially in the case where
a private for-profit organization and/or applicants with less experience looking to build affordable
housing development skills and abilities applies for funding. Partnerships are seen as opportunities to
build organizational capacity, achieve community outcomes, and reduce investment risk for Housing
Capital Funds.
ELIGIBLE BENEFICIARIES
The general purpose of the Housing Capital Fund is to create and preserve affordable housing that
meets the needs of low-income households earning up to 60% of area median income. SKHHP uses the
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development income limits and rent limits developed
for the Seattle-Bellevue Metro Area.
2023 Income and Rent Limits – King County Area Median Income $146,500
Maximum 2023 Household Income for Multifamily Rental Properties 1
$19,180 $21,920 $24,660 $27,400 $29,600 $31,800 $33,980 $36,180
$28,800 $32,900 $37,000 $41,100 $44,400 $47,700 $51,000 $54,300
$33,565 $38,360 $43,155 $47,950 $51,800 $55,650 $59,465 $63,315
$38,360 $43,840 $49,320 $54,800 $59,200 $63,600 $67,960 $72,360
$43,155 $49,320 $55,485 $61,650 $66,600 $71,550 $76,455 $81,405
$47,950 $54,800 $61,650 $68,500 $74,000 $79,500 $84,950 $90,450
$57,540 $65,760 $73,980 $82,200 $88,800 $95,400 $101,940 $108,540
1 https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/mtsp.html and https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il23/Section8-
IncomeLimits-FY23.pdf
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 5 of 12
Maximum Rent and Utilities for Projects Based on Unit Size
$479 $513 $616 $712 $795 $877
$720 $771 $925 $1,068 $1,192 $1,316
$839 $899 $1,078 $1,246 $1,391 $1,534
$959 $1,027 $1,233 $1,425 $1,590 $1,754
$1,078 $1,155 $1,387 $1,603 $1,788 $1,973
$1,198 $1,284 $1,541 $1,781 $1,987 $2,192
$1,438 $1,541 $1,849 $2,137 $2,385 $2,631
Maximum rent and utilities for projects based on unit size includes the cost of basic utilities paid by resident.
Unless the property pays ALL utilities, property must allow for the estimated amount the resident pays for
utilities when calculating rent charges, so that both together do not exceed the rent limits. Most properties use
public housing authority utility allowances. King County Housing Authority energy assistance supplements
(formerly called utility allowances).
ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES
SKHHP funds may be used for the following activities:
• Acquisition, and related costs such as appraisals, financing costs, and transaction costs
• Rehabilitation and new construction costs, including construction site development and off-site
development if necessary to ensure utility service to the project site
• Mixed-income projects so long as Housing Capital Fund dollars only assist units affordable at or
below 60% of area median income
At this time, SKHHP does not have funds to support early technical assistance or predevelopment
costs. Applicants in very preliminary stages are encouraged to apply to Impact Capital for
predevelopment funding.
SKHHP member cities understand that certain County, State, and Federal housing programs require
some level of matching by local resources. The SKHHP Housing Capital Fund is encouraged to be used
as a local match for these programs.
INELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES
Housing Capital Funds may NOT be used for:
The development of any non-residential use. Housing capital funds may be used in a mixed use
development only for that portion of the development that is specific to the residential use. This
restriction also applies to site development and off-site development costs for non-residential uses.
• The cost of any program operating expenses
• The cost of any political or lobbying activities or materials
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 6 of 12
• Rehabilitation of single-family housing units in a manner that would duplicate participating
jurisdictions’ housing repair assistance programs
• Uses that are public capital facilities such as correctional facilities or impatient treatment
facilities
PROJECT LOCATION
All projects funded under this program must be located within the SKHHP sphere of influence (see
ATTACHMENT A).
LOAN AND REGULATORY TERMS
Housing Capital Fund dollars will be made available as either secured grants or loans. SKHHP has
flexible terms designed to accommodate a range of projects and loan terms will vary based on the
financial needs of the project. Applicants should indicate in the application whether they are applying
for a grant or loan, and what loan terms are proposed for the project. Loan applicants will not receive
priority over grant applicants.
PERIOD OF AFFORDABILITY
SKHHP expects that projects will commit to providing long-term affordability in the form of a 50-year
regulatory agreement. A covenant will be recorded against the property that requires continued use of
the property for low-income housing for the period of affordability. During this period the owner or
property manager will be required to do annual reporting of tenant incomes and rents to ensure that
affordability requirements are met, and SKHHP will monitor those reports to ensure compliance. If the
project is converted to an alternative use or is otherwise not meeting the agreed upon terms in the
regulatory agreement any time during the project’s agreed-to term of affordability, the SKHHP Housing
Capital Fund contribution to the project will be subject to immediate repayment, and potentially a
proportionate share of appreciation.
OTHER AWARD TERMS/REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Additional funding conditions will be spelled out in an award letter to successful applicants. At a
minimum, the following reporting requirements shall apply during development and occupancy:
Quarterly Status Reports
Quarterly status reports are required from all Housing Capital Fund funded projects during the
development stage (from the time funds are awarded until completion and occupancy of the project).
The quarterly reports will minimally include the status of funds expended and progress to date. A final
budget must be prepared and submitted at the time of construction start and project completion.
SKHHP will rely on the quarterly reports to determine if satisfactory progress is being made on the
project. Additionally, SKHHP staff will inspect the project site at least once during the
development/construction stage.
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 7 of 12
Ongoing Monitoring
After occupancy, the project sponsor or manager will submit an annual report to SKHHP summarizing
the number of project beneficiaries, housing expenses for the target population, and the proportion of
those beneficiaries that are low- and/or moderate-income, and that meet other eligibility criteria
established in the SKHHP regulatory agreement. In addition, for projects with loan payments, financial
information must be reported annually which will be used for assessing contingent loan payments and
project health. All projects will also be evaluated periodically for long term sustainability. The annual
reports will be required for the full duration of affordability.
APPLICATION CONTENTS
SKHHP uses the Combined Funders Application forms, developed jointly with other public funders
including the State of Washington Department of Commerce and King County. The Combined Funders
Application forms, SKHHP application addendum, and SKHHP notice of intent to apply are available on
SKHHP’s website at: http://skhhp.org/home/housing-capital-fund/
Letter of consistency
Projects that are selected for funding have to demonstrate consistency with community priorities and
plans. Applicants must include a letter of consistency from the jurisdiction where the project is located
affirming the project is consistent with the Consolidated Plan, local comprehensive plan, and its
housing element, and any local housing action plans. The jurisdiction will be provided a template from
SKHHP which can be used to provide the needed information to the applicant.
Letter of community support
Projects that are selected for funding must demonstrate community support. Applicants must include
at least one letter of support from a community organization, faith-based institution, community
center, or school that serves the community where the project is proposed to be located.
The following materials are to be submitted for each application:
One complete electronic application on a flash drive that includes:
1. A letter of consistency from the jurisdiction where the project is proposed (PDF format)
2. A letter of community support (PDF format)
3. SKHHP Addendum with narrative responses in Word format
4. Combined Funders Application that meets the following:
o Attachments under each Tab should be placed in a separate folder labeled with the Tab
number.
o The Project Workbook must be in Excel format with linked sheets unlocked and
formulas visible.
Commented [CVG1]: Will need to update link once
available
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 8 of 12
Complete applications are to be submitted by 5:00 pm on September 15, 2023 to:
SKHHP
ATTN: Claire Vanessa Goodwin
25 W. Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001
If you are delivering in person, please reach out to SKHHP staff in advance to confirm a time for
application delivery. If you have any questions about application requirements, please contact Claire
Vanessa Goodwin at (253) 931-3042 or email cvgoodwin@skhhp.org.
REVIEW PROCESS
Proposals will be reviewed using the following process:
Step 1. An initial screening will be conducted by SKHHP staff and staff of the jurisdiction where the
project is proposed to be located to determine the completeness of each application. Staff reserves the
right to deny applications that are incomplete.
Step 2. SKHHP will evaluate the applications and develop a recommendation to the respective City
Councils. SKHHP’s recommendation will be made by its Advisory Board and approved by its Executive
Board.
Step 3. SKHHP member City Councils that have contributed funding will review and, approve, and
provide a statement of support for the funding recommendation submitted by SKHHP, or will return
the recommendation, with comments, for further investigation before a final decision is made. SKHHP
member jurisdictions where the project is proposed to be located that have NOT contributed funding
to the project via the SKHHP Housing Capital Fund will be asked for a letter of support prior to a final
funding decision being made.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
General
Evaluation of applications will focus on an overall evaluation of all of the following key areas:
• 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.
• Feasibility, timeliness, and cost effectiveness (i.e., SKHHP Housing Capital Fund award per
unit/square feet, total development cost per unit/square feet, reasonableness of schedule,
budgets, and proforma, adequacy of resources and ongoing sustainability, and site control
to ensure timely completion).
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 9 of 12
• Relevance of the project to local housing needs and funding priorities, 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.
• Suitability of the project sponsor and development team, including any track record
and/or housing development 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.
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. Higher land costs may be justified to account for strategic location such as proximity to
transit or other local amenities. SKHHP may use third party 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. 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, including a plan and
timeline for the proposed capital fundraising and, preferably, a track record of past or current capital
fundraising ability. Projects that will rely on public funding to cover the costs of ongoing operations or
services should identify and describe the availability of such funding, and report on the project’s
competitiveness for such funds based on discussions with likely funders.
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
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 10 of 12
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:
• 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.
• Facility: The facility management plan should include provisions for both routine and long-
term building maintenance.
• 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 to discuss what relocation assistance may be
available. Relocation costs should be included in the project budget. Projects funded with federal
dollars (e.g., CDBG funds) must meet all applicable federal relocation requirements.
F. Supporting Equity
The proposed project will be evaluated based on whether the development will advance SKHHP’s goals
of equity, including preserving existing communities at risk of displacement (which includes
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
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 11 of 12
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.
• Investing public dollars in areas traditionally/historically underserved or as a catalyst for further
investments and development.
DRAFT
SKHHP 2023 Housing Capital Fund Guidelines Page 12 of 12
ATTACHMENT A: SKHHP SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
Possible Sources of Affordable Housing Revenue
#Potential Source Description Action to Implement Enabling RCW
1 Property tax levy
Cities may impose additional regular property tax
levies of up to fifty cents per thousand dollars of
assessed value of property in each year for up to ten
•Affordable housing for households
up to 50% AMI
•Affordable homeownership, owner-
occupied home repair, and
foreclosure prevention programs for
households up to 80% AMI
•City must declare emergency with respect to the
availability of housing that is affordable to
households up to 80% AMI RCW 84.52.105
2 Local REET Option
impose an additional 0.25% REET for the construction
and support of affordable housing (HB 1628). The
proposal would have also created new tiers for the
statewide REET to support affordable housing, Legislative body may approve so long as the City is Amending RCW
3
General Fund Set-
Through the annual budgeting process, cities could
choose to designate a small portion of the General
Negotiable
Legislative body can adopt through annual budget
NA
4
Inclusionary Housing
housing in new development. Jurisdiction uses
revenue to construct
Negotiable Legislative body can adopt policy.NA
5 Sales property for affordable housing.Negotiable Legislative body can adopt policy.NA
6
Tax Increment
area and use the property tax portion of increases in
assessed value of properties within the increment
area to pay for public improvement costs (including
"Purchasing, rehabilitating,..., and
constructing housing for the purpose
of creating or preserving long-term
government must prepare a project analysis, hold
two public briefings, and have the plan reviewed by
the State Treasurer's Office. City must adopt
Chapter 39.114 RCW
Possible Sources of Affordable Housing Revenue
7
Commercial Linkage developments based on the need for workforce
<80% AMI households
Would likely require statutory authority through the
NA
8 Payroll tax
employees. Tax could be tiered based on size of
organization or gross profits. Would likely only work
as subregional effort to avoid business moving to
neighboring non-taxing cities.Negotiable Legislative body can adopt policy.NA
9 Collaborations and earmarks in South King County Up to the Executive Board facilitate.NA
10
State and Federal
Project Specific Line
Cities could share preservation projects ready to go
for SKHHP advocacy. Cities could also apply to the
Likely <60% AMI households
(land acquisition for Community Land Trust, large
rental property to partner with KCHA to preserve,
etc..). SKHHP to advocate for specific projects at
Additional Resources