Waunakee CDA leans toward community land trust and studies down‑payment aid; passes on direct rental assistance for now

The Waunakee Community Development Authority spent the bulk of its meeting reviewing options to use local affordable‑housing funds and directed staff to research two priorities: a community land trust (CLT) model and a down‑payment assistance program.

Staff opened the discussion by noting statutory constraints on TIF‑derived affordable housing funds and outlining common program choices. The committee discussed a down‑payment assistance model used elsewhere — including a volunteer‑repayment option described in Washington County — and asked staff to run hypothetical fund‑balance scenarios to show how various down‑payment shares (5%–10%) would affect the fund over time.

Members were strongly supportive of researching a community land trust. Al Dasso said the CLT model “has a lot of things we can do” and stressed the group’s interest in workforce housing specifically: “I am only interested in workforce housing at this point.” Board members explored nonprofit governance, tax‑exemption and disclosure implications, and potential funding from TIF extension, grants and employer contributions. Staff flagged past presentations from Kelly Westland (Bayfield County), the Madison Area Community Land Trust and Door County practitioners as reference cases to review.

Staff also summarized a request from the Waunakee Neighborhood Connection and an ecumenical board for assistance with emergency rental needs. According to staff, the neighborhood group’s fund provides roughly $1,000 monthly and staff said an annual donation of about $20,000–$30,000 would substantially increase capacity. Several CDA members said emergency assistance is appropriately handled by existing nonprofits and suggested that any one‑time village board donation — not a CDA ongoing program — would be a more suitable path.

On developer partnerships, staff suggested options including RFPs and financing assistance; the board reiterated its preference to prioritize CLT research and down‑payment options first, with developer partnering as a secondary path if the land‑trust approach proves infeasible. Staff was asked to return with redlines, examples and model numbers at the next meeting and to consider sending staff or a board representative to the Midwest Area Land Trust Conference in Madison for additional training.

The CDA did not approve new funding at the meeting; it approved the policy edits (see separate item) and directed staff to return with more detailed proposals before any funding decisions are made.