Housing advisory committee prioritizes impact-fee strategies and new housing programs

Members of the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee agreed to make impact fees and new housing programs a higher priority and to set aside dedicated time in upcoming meetings for focused brainstorming and staff briefings.

The committee’s chair opened the discussion by asking members to identify items they wanted to see on the work plan. Lucy (committee member, S4) urged the group to keep impact-fee strategies on the list. “I would personally suggest continuing as a committee to bring that up as a priority,” Lucy said, arguing that fee relief or deferral could be packaged to reduce developer carrying costs while preserving funding for schools and infrastructure.

Staff (S3) and committee members debated options such as delaying collection until certificate of occupancy versus outright waivers, and noted political sensitivity from school and county stakeholders. One member cautioned that school districts typically use impact-fee revenue and bond proceeds on different timelines, so any proposal should explain how schools and roads would still be funded.

Committee members also discussed two potential new programs: a first-time homebuyer assistance program and a tenant-based rental assistance program. Staff said the first-time homebuyer program would be new to the city and likely require an extended discussion; members suggested allocating between 20 minutes and a full two-hour meeting depending on how much draft policy staff brought forward.

The group agreed to test a hybrid approach for 2026: group related items into themed meetings (for example, impact fees and permitting in one session, density and flexible lot configurations in another), ask staff to present existing policy background in advance, and reserve 15–30 minutes in at least one meeting for open brainstorming so members could surface creative incentives.

Members asked staff to invite Brenda (city staff) for a Live Local Act update and to use that occasion to touch on related items such as density, parking and setback flexibility. Staff emphasized capacity constraints and recommended prioritizing mandatory reviews while scheduling deeper dives for new programs.

Next steps: staff will prepare background materials on existing policy, circulate a proposed meeting schedule that groups related items, and return with a draft agenda for the first substantive meeting early next year.