Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />0 <br />BOOK ! PAGE <br />To receive HOME funds, interested affordable housing developers must apply to the Florida Housing <br />Finance Corporation. Like many giant programs, the HOME program is a competitive grant process. <br />To maximize scores in this process, applicants need to secure a loc4l match. <br />One source of funds which may be used as a local match for HOME program funds is SHIP money. <br />As part of a HOME grant project, SHIP funds may be used to pay all or a portion of applicable <br />impact fees. In that case, a bank or other financial institution would take a first mortgage; the <br />HOME program would take a second mortgage, and the SHIP program would take a third mortgage <br />on each assisted home. <br />ANALYSIS <br />One of the goals of the county's local housing assistance plan is to increase home ownership for very <br />low and low income households. In many cases, an eligible household can afford a mortgage <br />payment, but cannot save money for down payment and closing costs. With a combination of <br />HOME program funds and SHIP program funds, eligible households may have the opportunity to <br />acquire housing units which are affordable. <br />Based on the Board of County Commissioners' actions at its September 7, 1999 meeting, county <br />staff prepared a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the SHIP funds set aside. Two proposals were <br />submitted in response to the RFP. <br />A selection committee, consisting of Jason Brown, Budget Analyst; Terry O'Brien, Assistant County <br />Attorney; and Robert Keating, Community Development Director, reviewed the submitted proposals <br />and heard presentations by the developers. Based on each firm's written proposal and presentation, <br />the selection committee ranked the two developers. The developers were ranked as follows: <br />Final Ranking: <br />1. Straka and Associates, Inc. <br />2. Heritage Rural Housing, Inc. <br />ALTERNATIVES <br />The Board of County Commissioners has two alternatives regarding the selection committee's <br />ranking. These alternatives are: <br />• To accept the selection committee's ranking <br />• Not to accept the selection committee ranking <br />Based on the analysis, staff supports the first alternative. <br />DECEMBER 14, 1999 <br />