Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Developers and advocates warn Round 16 scoring could penalize production, favor costly features
Summary
Several commenters at the Housing Division webinar urged staff to rethink scoring incentives, warning that awarding points for long affordability terms, deep affordability and many design/sustainability checks could increase per-unit costs and reduce the number of funded units; staff said they will consider comments and require stronger due diligence.
During the webinar on Round 16 Barnes Fund policies, multiple stakeholders said the draft scoring rubric could unintentionally favor more expensive projects and reduce overall unit production.
Reed (identified in the session by staff) argued the rubric "is awarding points to things that cost more and isn't necessarily focused on driving production of units," and warned that a one-time Barnes Fund award is insufficient to support deeply affordable or permanent supportive housing (PSH) without ongoing subsidies such as project-based vouchers. Reed said projects that previously scored…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
