From: 

To: Cerempim Michael
Subject: FW: Question RE: SMART Housing 8: CLTs
Date: Thursday, January 28, 2016 10:45:00 AM

 

Always tell me when you talk to reporters.

We need to prove this up before we talk to her. Pretend I?m the reporter. Gather the facts and
prove it to me before you talk to her. And then we?ll talk to her, with me leading the discussion.

Jason Stanford

Communications Director

Office of Mayor Steve Adler, City of Austin
301 Willie Nelson Blvd.

Austin, TX 78701

512978-2153 (direct)



From: Mayor Adler

Sent: Wednesday, January 2016 11:09 PM

To: Cortez, John Michael

Cc: Stanford, Jason; Wick, Jim

Subject: Re: Question RE: SMART Housing CLTs

my priority issue remains whether the City or City Council has the discretion in the future to
choose to only go to 8% and to spend 1/5 of the waived fees on cityor water dept budget
items. How quickly can we answer this?

On Jan 27, 2016, at 10:21 PM, Cortez, John Michael 
wrote:

Confirmed that this could have all been done administratively but for the fact it was
not in the full?purpose annexed area. Still awaiting other confirmation RE: staff
flexibility re: fee waiver S. Did you want to bring Jo in to discuss mechanics of this
deal? Lots of folks jumping to conclusions based on that misleading article. Also,
Nicely spoke to Lim at Statesman. They were NOT going to write a pilot knob articleMonitor article. I am worried that this deal is complicated
and difficult to explain. Also curious if we actually need to do anything to clear this up.
Agree with Jason that the important part is for council to understand how this works.
Perhaps requesting a memo to Council from NHCD on the benefits and AWU on the
(minimal) impact on utility? in any case, .I think we should take up with the Manager

our disappointment with statement in the Monitor article given the fact that we
proactively reached out and met with them on the potential impact of these fee
waivers in November. - 

From: Copic, Regina

Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 1:38 PM

To: Spencer, Betsy

Cc: Giello, Rebecca; Cortez, John Michael
Subject: Re: Question RE: SMART Housing CLTs

You are absolutely correct. We do not waive fees in limited purpose. Council needed to
approve the certification.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 27,2016, at 11:24 AM, Spencer, Betsy <Betsv.Snencw??austintexasgow wrote:
Gina,

Thanks for all of that information. John Michael and were just speaking.
Can you explain if/why there was any difference in the process for Pilot
Knob and why it seemed to be such a public conversation since we have
the administrative authority to approve these fee waivers. For some
reason, I thought it had to do with the fact that Pilot Knob was in the ETJ,
but I very likely may be wrong about that.

Thanks 

From: Giello, Rebecca

Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 9:33 AM

To: Cortez, John Michael; Copic, Regina

Cc: Spencer, Betsy

Subject: RE: Question RE: SMART Housing CLTs

Pilot Knob is the ?rst to use the fee waivers to secure units in a CLT. The
only other project that has used fee waiver to support their affordability
requirement is Mueller. However, these units are not a CLT they are
headed in that direction. However, the affordability model is shared

equigg.

 

From: Cortez, John Michael

Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 9:26 AM

To: Copic, Regina; Giello, Rebecca

Cc: Spencer, Betsy

Subject: RE: Question RE: SMART Housing CLTs

Great to hear. If it would be helpful, please let us know how we can be
supportive of those efforts. Certainly, we had better have some analysis
on the impact of the potential fee waivers on other departments, as the