Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Committee reviews acquisition-policy draft as members urge prioritizing city parcels for affordable housing
Loading...
Summary
City staff presented an acquisition-policy draft and a parcel list; committee members and public commenters discussed the limits of city property, potential donations, subsidy sources (ARPA/SHIP), and requested the acquisition and disposition policies be reviewed together ahead of the March 3 meeting.
City staff presented an acquisition-policy draft and an inventory of city and partner parcels for the committee to review, and committee members discussed whether the City of Pensacola should be expected to acquire land for affordable housing or rely on donations, surplus property and outside subsidies.
A staff member explained the draft is available for review and suggested tabling detailed discussion so the committee can provide feedback at the next meeting. "So this is available for you all to review," staff said, adding that Miss Stallworth pulled the materials together and staff welcome comments.
Committee members raised a recurring point of order: the city ‘‘is not generally in the business of purchasing property to dispose of it,’’ a position staff described as meaning the city typically purchases land for specific municipal functions rather than to hold and transfer lots for housing. Several members and commenters suggested instead promoting policy that prioritizes affordable housing when the city has surplus or underutilized parcels and exploring county-to-city donations or other mechanisms.
Staff identified specific parcels, including a donated single-family home on East Jordan Street that is listed for sale, and said ARPA state and local recovery funds were the primary subsidy being proposed for the parcels under discussion. Staff also said SHIP and other subsidy sources may be available to supplement the capital stack for buyers and CLT projects.
Public commenter Leslie Ando urged the committee and city to prioritize affordable housing when considering city-owned parcels and cited examples including Malcolm Young park and the Gibson School. Staff and committee members discussed the practical limits of acquiring abandoned properties, tangled title issues, tax-deed complexities and competing municipal priorities such as stormwater or fire station needs.
Committee members asked that the acquisition policy be reviewed alongside the disposition policy at the next meeting so the two documents can be considered together. Staff agreed to provide materials for review; the committee set its next meeting for March 3. No formal action or ordinance was adopted at this meeting.
