Discussion Paper - Initiatives
to Enhance the Miami-Dade Infill Housing
This paper was produced by a committee of individuals representing
developers (nonprofit and for profit) participating in the Infill Housing Initiative
and the Miami-Dade Housing Agency. This paper is a draft. The ideas contained herein
have not yet been endorsed by either the Miami-Dade Housing Agency or the participating
development corporations. They are being presented solely for the purpose of generating
SCATTERED SITE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
Create a scattered site, tax increment financing
(TIF) district . This strategy would allow the use of "tax increment financing"
(TIF) to provide a steady stream of funds for the Infill Housing Initiative
(which is currently unfunded).
Traditional use of TIF: Normally, the TIF mechanism is implemented as follows:
(1) a local government applies to the State for the establishment of a "CRA"
district with fixed boundaries; (2) to kick of the TIF mechanism a property tax
"base year" is designated for purposes of pegging assessed property values
within the district against which increased values in future years can be measured,
(3) the CRA district then harvests any increase in the amount of taxes collected
(the increment) over the amount of taxes collected during the "base year"
resulting from increases in assessed values, and (4) the CRA (in theory) is supposed
to then reinvest the increment back into the district.
Summary of the Proposed Scattered Site TIF District: The TIF district being
proposed herein would be significantly different from a typical CRA district utilized
in other parts of the County. The proposed scattered site TIF district would
include the only those parcels "certified" by MDHA to be included in its
Infill Housing Initiative. The increment for each would be tracked for 7 years
(at which point the lot in question would be released from the district).
Almost all of the infill lots conveyed to developers
by the County pursuant to the Infill Housing Initiative will require that a quite
title lawsuit be filed. This is because virtually all of the lots were acquired
by the County through tax deed. This is a big hassle for the developer that discourages
participation and delays construction.
The idea is as follows: the County would deed the lots to some sort of nonprofit
intermediary organization who would then perform the quiet title actions and take
other actions to make the lots developable (zoning changes, unity of titles,
etc.). The intermediary, using funding provided by the County, would retain one
or more attorneys who bring the quiet title actions. This approach would be cost
effective because (1) a volume discount could be negotiated with the attorney and,
(2) the "cleaned" lots would be ready for construction to begin, thus
putting the properties back on the tax rolls more quickly.
Third Proposal: REDUCE PRE-DEVELOPMENT LAND HOLDING
Under the Initiative County owned lots are deeded
to developers. The developers, however, must hold these vacant lots for a number
of months before they can begin construction. Often they must file a quiet title
lawsuit because a tax deed is in the chain of title and it takes a number of months
to get building permits. During this time period fines are imposed on the developer
if he or she fails to keep the lots clear of weeds and trash (vacant lots in deteriorated
neighborhoods are often a magnet for illegal dumping). This lot maintenance activity
is time consuming and costly for the developer. Prior to the conveyance, however,
while the lots are still owned by the County, the Solid Waste Department routinely
picks up any accumulated trash at not charge.
The idea being proposed is that the Solid Waste Department continue to
provide this service for the first six months AFTER title has been transferred
to the developer. This would reduce the developer's holding cost during the period
of time prior to beginning construction.
Fourth Proposal: WAIVER OF WATER AND SEWER
Developers participating in the Infill Housing
Initiative should not be required to pay water & sewer connection fees.
Fifth Proposal: EXPEDITE THE PERMITTING PROCESS
Obtaining a building permit is a time consuming
and costly process for developers doing scattered site infill development of single
family homes in distressed. Developer doing larger scale projects in the suburbs
are far better able to absorb such costs. The small developers not only have to
get the approval of the Building Department but they must also get all of the other
departments to sign off on their permit application (Zoning, Planning, DERM, Public
Works, WASA, etc.).
Summary of ideas:
The County Manager could ask every County department
to pledge a quick turn around on the permitting of lots which MDHA has "certified"
as being developed under the Initiative.
The Building Department could designate one
person to be a "permit expediter" for lots certified by MDHA to be a part
of the Initiative. The expediter job would be to "smooth the way"
for the processing of the permit. The expediter would tracks the project through
the process and help move the application through if it stalls. This will reduce
a developer's carrying costs and bring down the cost of the housing giving them
added incentive to participate in the Initiative