Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Affordability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council updates Legacy Homes rules, raises fee‑in‑lieu slightly amid affordability concerns
Summary
The Whitefish City Council adopted Resolution 26‑16 updating the Legacy Homes Program’s administrative procedures and adjusted fees in lieu—raising the per‑unit fee modestly—after staff said the increase reflects HUD income updates and regional market data; public commenters urged less reliance on cash‑in‑lieu and a unit‑equivalency approach.
Whitefish — The City Council on June 15 adopted Resolution 26‑16, an annual update to the Legacy Homes Program that adjusts the program’s administrative procedures, affordable purchase and rental price tables and the fee‑in‑lieu calculation.
City housing staff member Tami told the council that HUD’s updated income limits and data from the Northwest Montana Association of Realtors (NMAR) drove the change and recommended a half‑percent increase in the cash‑in‑lieu fee, moving the per‑unit gap calculation from $378,089 to $380,092.
“That fee accounts for the affordability gap per unit, not the price to build an affordable unit,” Tami said, noting an example where a household at 100% AMI could afford roughly $346,000 for a three‑bedroom home while NMAR data show a comparable home costing about $726,000.
Why it matters: Council members and members of the public said cash payments can underdeliver. Public commenter Richard Hildner argued that cash‑in‑lieu often yields “a minuscule amount of money” and may represent “the equivalent of half a dwelling” rather than actual units, urging the city to require unit‑equivalency or clearer formulas so developers cannot simply pay out and avoid supplying affordable units.
Councillor Ben Davis acknowledged the concern and reminded the council that the Legacy Homes program requires proportionate unit sizes to match market portions and that cash‑in‑lieu is intended only when onsite affordable units cannot practicably be provided. “I also do not like cash in lieu,” Davis said, and recommended staff clarify how the program enforces unit mix and discretionary findings used when allowing cash alternatives.
Action taken: Davis moved to approve Resolution 26‑16; the motion was seconded by Councillor Norton and carried unanimously.
What’s next: Staff said it will continue to monitor AMI methodology and may recommend adjustments to AMI targets in future updates to better meet community needs.
Ending: The council adopted the procedural and pricing updates that will be incorporated into program materials; any substantive redesign of the Legacy Homes policy would require a separate policy action.
