City Council Special Meeting - Kindlewood Phase 3 bond issuance   4/27/2026

I call the Charlottesville Special City Council meeting to order.

Vice Mayor Oschrin?

Here.

Councilor Payne?

Here.

Today we have one action item on the agenda and it's a resolution authorizing the Housing Authority to issue up to $7 million in a tax exempt revenue bond for Kendallwood Phase 3.

I'm Madelyn Metzler, Acting Housing Program Manager with Neighborhood Development Services, and as the Mayor mentioned, I'm presenting a resolution authorizing the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority, or CRHA, to issue up to $7 million in tax-exempt revenue bonds for Phase III of the Kindlewood Redevelopment Project.

Thank you for your time this evening.

This item was originally scheduled for your April 20th meeting but was rescheduled for tonight so that we could correct the amount of the bond amount that was listed in the public notice and that correct amount is up to seven million dollars.

I'll briefly review tonight what this action is, why it's needed, and what council is being asked to do.

And I'm also joined here by Kathleen Matthews, Deputy Executive Director of CRHA, who can answer any additional questions you might have at the end.

And with that I'll begin.

As many of you know, Piedmont Housing Alliance, or PHA, is leading the redevelopment of Friendship Court into the new Kindlewood community.

Once completed, Kindlewood will replace the existing slash some previously existing 150 town home apartments with a 385 unit income tiered neighborhood.

And that will also include resident services, a community center, a park, and an early learning center.

The development has been carefully planned and phased to avoid displacing current residents.

And the focus of tonight's meeting is phase three of the project, which will include 85 new units in total,

and of those 24 will be townhomes.

The townhomes will be financed using a combination of tax exempt bonds and low income housing tax credits or LIHTC equity.

And for added context, the city has also included support for phase three in the capital improvement program with a total of $4.15 million planned across FY 27 and FY 28.

The CIP funding is separate from and not affected by the bond action before you tonight.

To finance the space, PHA plans to use a combination of tax-exempt revenue bonds and 4% LIHTC credits.

Access to those credits requires CRHA to serve as what's called a conduit issuer for the bonds.

What that means in practice is CRHA would issue the $7 million in revenue bonds on behalf of the project.

Neither the city nor CRHA is financially responsible for repaying these bonds.

That's the, when we say revenue bonds, it's the revenue from the project that will go towards repaying those bonds.

And all payments, fees and costs are the responsibility of the borrower.

which in this case is a subsidiary of PHA that exists specifically for the development of this project.

In other words, this action supports affordable housing financing but it does not create any financial obligation for the city or for CRHA.

Issuing these bonds does however unlock access to the 4% LIHTC credits that are essential financing tool for this project.

and this type of bond issuance is allowed under the Virginia Housing Authority's law.

The specific section that is applicable is included in your packet tonight and under that law the CRHA is authorized as a housing authority to issue revenue bonds for affordable housing projects with council's approval ultimately.

And CRHA's Board of Commissioners has already adopted its inducement resolution back on March 23rd and the final stop is, or final step is council's approval this evening.

The city staff recommends that council adopts the resolution that's in front of you this evening.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Do you have any questions?

Lloyd?

Not really a question, just a comment.

I was on the PHA board for 12 years, and the one thing that struck me about all the projects we wound up doing was just how many incredibly disparate parts there are to making any of these things work.

So it's up to seven million.

As it's written, it can fund really any part of it.

OK, cool.

No, I second what Counselor Snook said.

I've learned a lot about the LIHTC process and the capital stacking required and the just administrative onus.

It's such an effort that has to go into putting all of these pieces together.

So I'm glad we can help in this instance.

Yeah, I mean my only question is the resolution that CRHA passed was for up to 7 million.

That was PHA's request.

Fortunately, everything was able to work out.

And we're here today because what was in front of council was not up to $7 million.

It was a lower incorrect dollar amount.

The deadline was April 30.

There's not always a guarantee that we would be able to hold a meeting before that deadline had passed, if something happened in the future.

As others mentioned, the capital stack is very complex.

So any risk is a negative thing, all of which say,

What happened where what the CRHA board passed was up to 7 million?

That was PHA's request.

Sure.

The initial request, as I understand it, from PHA to CRHA was for $3.4 million.

That was previously in the packet.

That request amount changed at some point in time.

And it was correct in the packet that went to the CRHA board.

However, that information

Yeah, I think it goes with what Lloyd was saying is that it's a lot of moving pieces, but I'm glad we had the flexibility to be able to do that.

Second.

All in favor, please say yes.

Yes.

All opposed, please say no.

So moved.

All in favor please say yes.

Yes.

All opposed please say no.