Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Scott Street Pilot topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Monroe council holds first reading of PILOT for 46‑unit Scott Street affordable housing project
Summary
At its Aug. 19 meeting, Monroe City Council heard a first reading of an ordinance to authorize a payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOT) for a 46‑unit Low‑Income Housing Tax Credit project at 75 Scott Street. Staff presented revenue estimates and recommended a 6% total payment structure; council set a Sept. 29 special meeting for a second reading and public hearing.
Monroe City Council on Aug. 19 held the first reading of Ordinance 25‑007, a payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOT) proposal tied to a 46‑unit redevelopment at 75 Scott Street proposed by Woda Cooper. The project would be financed with Low‑Income Housing Tax Credits and delivered as 24 one‑bedroom and 22 two‑bedroom units.
Director of Economic and Community Development Mark Cochran summarized the city’s analysis of potential revenue and the proposed payment structure, telling the council the development’s estimated net operating income ranges “about 277,000 to 560,000.” From that range, Cochran said, a 4% payment would be dispersed among taxing jurisdictions and the administration negotiated an additional municipal services payment intended to cover city service costs, arriving at what staff described as a recommended “total, percentage of rent income of 6%.” As Cochran put it, “we landed at a recommendation for 6%.”
Staff presented illustrative calculations showing that 4% of the staff’s income range would produce roughly $11,000 to $22,000 annually; Cochran said the city’s share of the dispersed amount would be about 35% of that total. Cochran also described a separate municipal services agreement that the city would retain in full to help cover police, fire and other support costs. The administration qualified the numbers as estimates: “these are just estimates,” Cochran said.
Council members pressed staff for clarity about the percentages. Councilman Felder questioned whether the additional 2% was additive or calculated relative to the 4% figure; staff clarified the calculation point, prompting the council to ask for follow‑up detail before a final decision. As Cochran noted, the calculation method and revenue estimates can vary with occupancy and rents.
The ordinance is a first reading only; no final vote was taken. Councilwoman Stilgrave moved to place the ordinance on the floor for first reading and set a special council meeting on Sept. 29 for a second reading and a public hearing.
Next steps: staff said it will provide detailed revenue modeling and answer council questions before the Sept. 29 second reading and public hearing.
