Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing Grievance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Housing authority approves $654.60 payment after closing delay grievance
Summary
The Silverton Housing Authority voted unanimously June 22 to grant a $654.60 remedy to a buyer whose closing was delayed by 30 days after state eligibility rules were applied. Staff said SHA already paid a $633.94 rate‑lock fee and recommended covering the housing‑cost difference.
The Silverton Housing Authority on June 22 voted unanimously to pay $654.60 to a buyer whose closing on an Anvil Town Homes unit was delayed after the Colorado Division of Housing applied additional eligibility rules.
The grievance was filed by Mr. Jeffrey Row, whose closing moved from May 12 to June 12 after the Division of Housing told SHA the project was subject to revolving‑loan‑fund (RLF) guidelines that the authority had not previously applied. "Under the new guidelines, the RLF guidelines, the two‑person household was over an eligibility limit," SHA staff said in the hearing.
SHA staff member Miss Chase told the board the authority had already absorbed a $633.94 mortgage rate‑lock extension fee at closing. "We paid that at closing," she said, adding that staff recommended the authority also cover the difference between Row’s rent and his new mortgage during the 30‑day delay.
Row described his application process and said confusion in the authority’s guidelines prompted the re‑filing as a two‑person household. "Page 17 of the SHA guidelines implies that a tenant is someone who is there while the owner is not present," he told the panel, and said he had not realized the rule implications at first.
Board members questioned whether remedy spending would deplete a citizen engagement line item in the 2026 budget; staff said the line item had sufficient remaining funds but covering Row’s full request would use about 85% of that line item. The board discussed alternative budget sources but ultimately concluded the delay stemmed from a qualification error and that Row should not bear the financial consequences.
A motion to approve Row’s grievance request carried on a roll call vote with all members voting yes. The hearing officer said the board’s determination would be binding subject to timely appeal.
The authority also discussed clarifying local guidelines to reduce future confusion between SHA rules and state RLF guidelines; staff said they would return with suggested revisions.
