Dane County committee reviews guidelines for $28 million in affordable housing funds, tightens tenant protections

The Dane County Health and Human Needs Committee reviewed draft application guidelines Thursday for two county affordable housing funds totaling $28 million and discussed tenant protections, set-asides for people experiencing homelessness and how projects will be scored.

Committee members heard details on an $8 million capital fund intended for projects that do not use Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and a $20 million allocation aimed at projects using LIHTC. Interim Director Iyayu Kumre told the committee staff will post applications and guidelines "by June, early July" to align LIHTC funding recommendations with tax credit application timelines.

The discussion matters because the county is directing a significant one-time capital investment toward both preservation and new affordable housing, and staff proposed firm tenant protections and candidate screening rules intended to reduce barriers for people with criminal records, prior evictions or limited rental history.

Jenna Mothridge, housing access and affordability staff, outlined major program rules under consideration: the non-LIHTC fund would require 40 years of affordability and currently proposes that all units be income- and rent-restricted to households at 60% of area median income (AMI), with staff acknowledging public feedback about allowing projects to have a mixed-income unit mix while limiting subsidies to the lower-income units. The LIHTC-directed fund would require a 40-year affordability period and a minimum share of units at 30% AMI, with an existing baseline that 10% of units be targeted for households experiencing literal homelessness; supervisors discussed raising that set-aside to 20%.

Mothridge described the county's Tenancy Addendum and the Fair Tenant Selection criteria, both already incorporated into Affordable Housing Development Fund awards. The Tenancy Addendum limits security deposits and late or penalty fees, requires reasonable guest and parking rules, calls for access to common spaces for youth and proposes a new requirement that landlords provide written notice with grounds at least 30 days before termination of tenancy. The fair-selection rules would be baseline requirements for projects, under which applicants cannot be denied solely for lack of prior housing history, inability to meet minimum income ratios if comparable stability is shown for 24 months, membership in a protected class, or certain court records; narrow exceptions remain for recent convictions for violent or specified drug activity when required by other federal assistance.

Public commenters addressed the drafts. Paul Schechter urged the committee to allow flexibility so existing residents are not displaced when projects are preserved, and to permit per-unit subsidies rather than underwriting over-income units. Schechter also recommended allowing reasonable developer fees to cover multi-year predevelopment work for nonprofits. James Monroe, representing a community group proposing an "affordable progressive housing" model that aims to move residents toward homeownership, asked staff how community proposals could be submitted and considered alongside the county funding programs; staff responded that applicants can contact the housing division and that other funding sources (CDBG, HOME) and partnerships such as the Madison Area Community Land Trust are possibilities.

Committee members raised implementation concerns. Supervisor Tom Rylander asked how the homelessness set-aside counts units after a tenant who qualified for the set-aside remains in place; staff said a unit filled by a person experiencing homelessness continues to count toward the target until turnover. Supervisors sought to ensure projects in transit-oriented development areas are not penalized in site-disbursement scoring and asked staff to consider travel-cost impacts when evaluating location.

Several supervisors and staff discussed lease-up mechanics and screening practices. Mothridge and Casey Becker, Division Administrator, said staff monitor lease-up meetings among developers, property managers and service providers and review denial documentation; they acknowledged third-party tenant-screening products can be opaque. Committee members urged stronger coordination for coordinated-entry units and recommended dedicated supportive-services funding levels (one estimate discussed in committee materials was roughly $5,000 per coordinated-entry unit, an approach some supervisors said could translate into partial case-manager funding for projects).

Staff highlighted related timelines and constraints: emergency rental assistance funded through Treasury rules must be spent by the end of September and those programs are winding down; the LIHTC-focused county guidelines must be posted in June or early July to allow applicants to plan tax credit submissions.

The committee approved routine minutes from its May 8 meeting by unanimous consent before the presentation. Later, without objection, members adjourned the meeting.