DCA details how federal 9% housing tax credit and state match fund affordable rentals, emphasizing rural set‑asides

Carmen Chubb, deputy commissioner for housing at the Department of Community Affairs, and Laurel Hart, DCA’s division director for housing and finance, told the State Planning & Community Affairs committee that Georgia relies on the federal 9% Low‑Income Housing Tax Credit and a matching state credit to finance most affordable rental housing in the state.

"The Georgia Housing Credit is one of DCA's largest and most successful tools for encouraging private investment in the creation and preservation of affordable rental housing," Hart said, describing the program’s pay‑for‑success approach: credits are awarded only after properties are completed and occupied, and can be recaptured for noncompliance.

Hart said the program includes a 35% rural set‑aside and a rural preservation initiative to maintain smaller properties. She noted that Georgia tax credit properties house more than 100,000 units in the state’s portfolio and that, because credits are leveraged with other financing, approximately $28,000,000 in credits allocated in 2018 translated into about 2,300 units of housing that year across roughly 35 properties.

Committee members pressed DCA on tenant eligibility and local impacts. In response to a question from Representative Jackson, Hart said tenants at tax credit properties generally must have incomes at or below 80% of area median income (AMI), though Georgia policies sometimes establish lower local income thresholds. Hart also described tenant‑site partnerships—such as preventive health screenings and counseling at senior properties like Myrtle Terrace—that DCA uses to improve resident health outcomes.

Officials acknowledged the program’s limits. Carmen Chubb said rising construction costs and growing need mean credit allocations meet “less and less” of the need; DCA staff noted preservation of aging properties is increasingly urgent. Hart offered to provide committee members with additional, location‑specific market studies and historical data on credit allocations and portfolio changes.

DCA did not propose a legislative change in the presentation. Instead, staff described program mechanics, eligibility, recent production figures and where DCA sees gaps between available credit, rising costs and statewide demand.

The committee paused the session to move to the next agenda item; DCA staff said they would follow up with requested county‑level data and additional context on production and preservation strategies.