title
Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding a 9% Housing Tax Credit scoring appeal for Anacua Senior Village
end
RECOMMENDED ACTION
recommendation
WHEREAS, Anacua Senior Village is a 2024 competitive 9% Housing Tax Credit Application that requests $2,000,000 in Housing Tax Credits to reconstruct 104 units, 92 of which as affordable, serving the elderly population in Mission;
WHEREAS, a pre-application was filed for this Application in January 2024 which indicated that the Application would include 90 Units;
WHEREAS, because the Units increased by more than 10% from pre-application to Application, the Application does not qualify for six points related to Pre-application Participation, and these points were deducted from the Application’s score as indicated in the scoring notice issued on May 23, 2024;
WHEREAS, the Applicant appealed this scoring notice to the Executive Director, who denied the appeal; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant requested that this matter be presented to the Governing Board.
NOW, therefore, it is hereby
RESOLVED, that the appeal of the scoring notice for Anacua Senior Village is hereby denied.
end
BACKGROUND
Anacua Senior Village is a 2024 competitive 9% Housing Tax Credit Application that requests $2,000,000 in Housing Tax Credits to reconstruct 104 units, 92 of which as affordable, serving the elderly population in Mission. A pre-application was submitted in January 2024, and the full Application was submitted on March 1, 2024. The pre-application indicated that the total number of Units in the Application would be 90, but the total included in the final Application was 104, which is approximately a 15% increase between the pre-application and the Application.
In accordance with 10 TAC §11.9(e)(3), an Application is eligible for six points related to Pre-application Participation so long as certain criteria are met, including that the total number of Units does not increase by more than 10% from pre-application to Application. Because this criteria was not met, staff issued a scoring notice on May 23, 2024, which reduced the Application’s total score by six points. An appeal of that scoring notice was timely submitted on May 29, 2024.
The appeal asserts that the number of Units reported in the pre-application was an error, and that the presence of this error creates an inconsistency within this Application that should be curable as an Administrative Deficiency, as defined at 10 TAC §11.1(d)(2). While the Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP) does allow for inconsistencies in an Application to be corrected, a variance between the units proposed at pre-application and the Units included in the final Application does not create an inconsistency that is necessary for staff’s evaluation of the Application, which is the basis of the Administrative Deficiency process, as is established in the definition:
Administrative Deficiency - Information requested by Department staff to clarify, explain, confirm, or restrict the Development proposal to a logical and definitive plan or to provide missing information in the original Application or pre-application; or to assist staff in evaluating the Application or pre-application that, in the Department staff's reasonable judgment, may be cured by supplemental information or explanation which will not necessitate a substantial reassessment or re-evaluation of the Application or pre-application
Such variances in Unit count are expected, and are explicitly contemplated in the rule in question. Changes to the Application that are submitted only to qualify for points claimed in the Application are prohibited by 10 TAC §11.1(d)(2)(B)(ii), and because staff has identified no other purpose for the Units in the pre-application to be updated, the QAP appears to prohibit the requested change.
Additionally, in the event that an Administrative Deficiency were issued and the Unit count in the pre-application were changed, the Application would still not qualify for pre-application points, as the total number of Units would still have increased by more than 10% from the pre-application’s submittal to the full Application.
Accordingly, the Executive Director denied the appeal on June 3, 2024. Staff recommends that the Board also deny the appeal for the reasons outlined above.