Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Martinez council debates how to spend ~$460,000 affordable housing fund; staff recommends ADU incentives
Loading...
Summary
Staff outlined five uses for about $460,000 in the city's affordable housing fund — gap financing, a NOFA, first-time buyer aid, home-rehab, and an ADU incentive program (staff's recommendation). Council asked staff to explore county/nonprofit partnerships and return with clearer options and funding sources.
City staff presented options on April 15 for using approximately $460,000 in Martinez's affordable housing fund and sought council direction on a preferred program to develop.
Michael Cass, assistant community and economic development director, said the fund cannot build units outright but can seed programs that leverage outside funding. He outlined five options: 1) gap financing for affordable multifamily projects, 2) issuing a notice of funding availability (NOFA) for predevelopment and acquisition, 3) first-time homebuyer assistance, 4) housing rehabilitation assistance, and 5) an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) incentive program — staff's recommended option given the fund's size.
"With the recent sale of the Lafayette Street parcel, we have approximately $460,000 available in our fund. It's not much. I can't build a unit, but it's a good start," Cass (S11) said.
Council members expressed concern the fund is small relative to housing costs. Some members favored option 4 (rehab assistance) or option 5 (ADU incentives) as offering more immediate, local impact; others wanted a NOFA (option 2) to support small multiunit projects led by nonprofits or faith groups. Members asked staff to investigate partnering with county programs and nonprofit providers to amplify the dollars and to return with options showing likely outcomes, timelines and how the city could avoid prevailing wage pitfalls where applicable.
Public commenters included Donna Colombo (S9), representing Grace Episcopal, who advocated a NOFA to support a proposed 40—50-unit project on church property; housing attorney and resident Mike Levin (S12) suggested rental and utility assistance as alternatives to construction subsidies.
Council did not take action to commit funds; staff was directed to return with more detailed, tabular options, potential leverage partners, and recommended implementation steps.
