Middleton committee outlines next steps after council adopts housing action plan

The Middleton Workforce Housing Committee met April 20 to discuss early implementation steps after the Common Council adopted the city'wide housing action plan on April 7. Members heard staff proposals for regular progress reporting, refinements to developer fees and next steps on staffing and committee alignment.

Scott, a city staff member who presented the materials, said the council'level adoption included two motions: one to remove program callouts from the plan and another to remove a proposed full'time staff position. "That one also did not have other members of council speak up sharing the same sentiment," a staff summary said; committee members noted the motion to remove the staffing line did not receive a second at council and therefore did not pass.

Why has Middleton seen few new legally restricted affordable units recently? Scott told the committee the shortfall reflects a combination of developer decisions, the absence until recently of a local incentive fund, and changes in the competitiveness of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program. He said the housing action plan'fund measures are intended to make Middleton more competitive for those projects.

Committee member Lisa recommended publishing a concise annual "housing snapshot" that would track progress. "I think it would be a good idea to start reporting in simple format what progress we've made over the past year," Lisa said, urging a format similar to Sun Prairie's snapshot. Staff proposed two graphics (total units and affordable units) and a supporting table as the core of an ongoing snapshot.

Members raised that the plan contains a table showing "affordable" units only when units are legally restricted through a contract or program, such as projects financed by the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit; staff emphasized this distinction to avoid conflating lower-market rents with legally restricted affordability.

The committee also discussed developer fees and parkland dedication rules. Staff explained the "fee in lieu" option used when a site cannot dedicate park acreage, converting an acreage cost to a per'unit charge. Members flagged that the current fee table treats one'bedroom multi'family units differently from larger units and asked staff to examine whether that structure unintentionally incentivizes smaller units.

On process, members discussed whether the workforce housing committee should remain after the Community Development Authority (CDA) takes on administration. Several members supported a gradual, year'long transition with the committee staying involved through the first-year implementation, then reassessing merger and membership prior to shrinking or folding responsibilities into the CDA.

The committee had no formal votes on plan implementation at the meeting; it approved the previous meeting minutes without objection and concluded with a motion to adjourn. Staff said it will return with proposed snapshot metrics, fee questions routed to parks staff as appropriate, and future agenda items on ADU outreach and zoning refinements.