Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Multifamily Expansion topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee tables proposed CDBG expansion to multifamily rehab until Sept. 15

Evanston Housing and Community Development Committee · July 21, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff sought committee approval to use up to $300,000 of CDBG funds to pilot multifamily building rehabs (up to three projects) with 0% deferred loans and 51% of units kept affordable; members asked for scoring tweaks and the measure was tabled to Sept. 15.

City staff asked the Housing and Community Development Committee to approve a new multifamily rehab program that would use Community Development Block Grant funds to support building-wide life- and health-safety repairs for buildings with more than five units.

"We're asking for the committee to approve this program," staff said, proposing an initial allocation of up to $300,000 from the existing fund balance to support a maximum of three projects. Under the draft framework, multifamily loans would be 0% interest deferred loans with a 15-year term (reduced to 10 years for loans under $75,000), loan sizes would range from $50,000 to $150,000, and 51% of units in a building would need to be affordable at or below 80% AMI.

Council members questioned whether the minimum 51% at 80% AMI is the right baseline, how the scoring matrix would treat rents versus tenant incomes, whether prioritizing critical code violations could create perverse incentives for negligent owners, and whether private-equity landlords would be able to access the funds. Staff said the scoring criteria would be tuned to emphasize deeper affordability, number of affordable units and urgency, and that initial outreach and a limited pilot (three projects) would test demand. A committee member moved to table the item until the Sept. 15 meeting for further review; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote, and the proposal was tabled.