May 16, 2023 Executive Committee meeting
Attending: L.E. Alexander, Randall Borror, Sharron Bouquin, David Bragg, Shane Brogan, David Burnette, Tiffany Carver, Elizabeth Dubose, Leah Hefner, Keith Hines, James Holman, Rebecca Howell, Todd Hux, Kira Jones, Angenette McAdoo, Arlene Medder, Katie Musgrove, Joe Ormond, Sara Pettaway, Laura Pratt, Annetta Streater, Charles Streeter, Janet Steele, Matthew Teal, Tracey Wetherby Williams, Jacob Womack
Chair Katie Musgrove called the meeting to order at 11:32 a.m. She welcomed Chapel Hill Town Council member Paris Miller-Foushee to speak on affordable housing issues, a topic of importance to the Employee Forum given the number of staff who work here but cannot afford to live in Chapel Hill. Miller-Foushee thanked the committee for the invitation and confirmed that she would discuss the housing choice amendment that is being proposed and presented before the Council, as well as affordable housing as a whole in Chapel Hill.
Paris-Foushee asked committee members to provide their impressions on this issue via the Zoom chat. She confirmed that only two attendees live in Chapel Hill. She spoke about housing in general, noting that the United States is now facing a housing crisis. In addition to an affordable housing crisis, the nation has not built enough housing. She said that North Carolina has only about 43 available rentals for every 100 extremely low-income households.
Similarly, here in Chapel Hill, there is a limited housing supply with decreasing home ownership opportunities, along with increasing rental costs and other burdens. Now, current construction along Fordham Boulevard may seem to contradict this assertion, but Miller-Foushee said that the data is very clear. Jobs, not students, are driving most of the demand for new housing in Chapel Hill. Low density development patterns, constrained land availability, and public opposition to new development have all resulted in limited housing production in Chapel Hill since 2010.
Miller-Foushee said that Chapel Hill has had only a 1% net growth of housing units since 2011, with neighboring communities like Durham experiencing a 21% increase, Cary a 35% increase, and Apex a 76% increase in constructed housing. Thus, perception and data regarding this issue are completely different.
Limited housing supply in Chapel Hill has led to a lack of diversity in housing types, creating a competitive housing market here that has put home ownership out of reach for most households. The Town has had a 29% overall decrease in home ownership, Miller-Foushee said. Rising housing costs and attendant displacement pressures have disproportionately impacted Chapel Hill’s Black population, particularly in historic neighborhoods like the Northside community. Black ownership has decreased by 32% amongst Black people in Chapel Hill, compared to a 3% decrease for White people. Miller-Foushee said that these figures address only housing supply, not even needs for affordable housing.
The Town entered a joint study with UNC-Chapel Hill to analyze its housing needs and drivers in the local housing market. This study considered the Town’s needs, fundamental decisions, and the next steps required to make these decisions.
Tracy Wetherby Williams asked if anyone on the Employee Forum was involved with this study. The Chair recalled a similar study in which she had participated recently. Williams wondered since staff were not included in some of these conversations, perhaps affordable housing was not actually considered as an issue and that stakeholders were not actually engaged.
Miller-Foushee said that the study pulled in a diverse pool of folks to discuss what works and how these efforts affect our housing supply. She said that the Town has made efforts to engage UNC, with attempts to bring the university and UNC Health together in partnership to meet overall housing needs. She thus knew that there are ongoing efforts for that input and outreach.
Leah Hefner raised a question related to the Town’s inclusionary zoning ordinance, from the point of view of the Planning Department faculty member who met with the Forum’s Personnel Issues committee recently. This faculty member seemed to imply that the ordinance is not really effective, as the ordinance is supposed to protect or allow for 10-15% affordable housing units for every new development in Chapel Hill. The faculty member stated that this goal is not occurring as developers find ways around the ordinance.
Miller-Foushee said that the inclusionary zoning ordinance and the goal of 10-15% of new development to be reserved for affordable housing are too often conflated, leading to confusion. She said that amendments before the Town now concerning inclusionary zoning are different from the Town’s affordable housing efforts. Inclusionary zoning is about increasing the overall housing supply.
The Town does not have the legal authority to demand that any development provide an allotment of affordable housing. Any attempt to impose this demand could result in lawsuits and adverse legal judgment. The Town does try to encourage developers to meet this goal and does make the ask. Still, the Town cannot require this goal. She said it is important to understand what powers are available to municipalities to address affordable housing needs. The Town sets goals for 15% affordable housing and 60% of household Area Median Income (AMI), but sometimes developers can only accomplish 80% or 110%.
Still, the Town cannot mandate affordable housing to developers, but is pleased when developers are willing to work with the Town in meeting the affordability needs of the community. Miller-Foushee added that no municipality, city, or county can impose rent control in North Carolina, as this course is not allowed under state law. She added that there is a bill in the state legislature to create exceptions to this law. Unfortunately, for now, the Town must shoulder most of the need in affordable housing. Miller-Foushee said that affordable housing is very expensive, with land alone starting at $250,000 per lot. One single family must bear this burden, which prices out many families.
Moving to the Town’s proposed housing choice amendments, Miller-Foushee recalled the lawn signs opposed to rezoning that are popular along East Franklin Street. She said that the Town can choose to deny business with developers who will not agree to include 10-15% affordable housing. However, if a developer has land, it is their right to develop their land, and the Town is not in a position to stop that kind of development, as no authority exists to mandate levels of affordable housing.
Miller-Foushee stated that the housing choice proposal is one strategy among many, and that the Town has worked for many years to bring a holistic approach to developing and creating housing. A holistic approach would run counter to the current project-by-project strategy and would include land for climate action, increased housing and affordable housing, increased parkways, greenways, multimodal transit, and overall economic development. She stated the importance of understanding that housing choice amendments around inclusionary zoning do not compose an affordable housing strategy, but rather compose an effort to increase housing and housing types.
Miller-Foushee observed that most of the housing built in Chapel Hill until around 2010 were single-family homes, with multi-apartment buildings being largely constructed since then. What is missing is the middle type of housing, such as duplexes, triplexes, and quadruplexes, or townhomes/smaller housing cottages. She observed that the cost of land in Chapel Hill is $250,000 and exclusionary zoning makes it illegal to build anything other than a single-family home on a plot of land.
Inclusionary zoning would allow multi-family homes to be built on the same allotment of land, thus making housing more affordable. Again, this course does not necessarily equate to affordable housing, as affordable housing does require targeting households in a particular area earning AMI at 80% or below.
Miller-Foushee said that exclusionary zoning has a history steeped in racial discriminatory practices and unfortunately makes up the majority of zoning types throughout the United States. Here in Chapel Hill, nearly 70% of housing is zoned for single-family residences. Miller-Foushee said that the Town wishes to move away from exclusionary zoning as it faces its housing crisis. An inclusionary zoning approach will address community needs for housing and diversity. The study mentioned previous findings that housing needs are not being met for first-time buyers, families with young children, diverse buyers, empty nesters, seniors, and young professionals who want to stay in town and be a part of a diverse, inclusive community.
Complete communities or purpose-built communities work to ensure that housing addresses every facet of our lives, from children to seniors, along an economic spectrum, Miller-Foushee said. However, currently in town the choice between single-family homes and multi-family apartment dwellings excludes choices in the middle between those two options.
Miller-Foushee shared slides in the chat depicting the types of missing middle housing that would address these needs. These include accessory-dwelling apartments, known as “granny flats”, for caretaking of elderly parents. She said that the amendment allows for this type of housing to be built in one’s own backyard to keep one’s loved ones near.
Duplexes offer an opportunity for more affordable rentals and also potential for more affordable home ownership for young couples trying to find a first home. Triplexes and fourplexes also offer smaller dwellings with a smaller footprint, addressing the cost of new housing in town which can reach $300/square foot. These smaller dwellings compose more accessible housing types for buyers.
Miller-Foushee said that Airbnb’s now have stipulations that owners must spend 60% of one’s time in the unit each year. State legislatures are working to remove these restrictions nationally. She noted the push and pull with local municipalities and state government in this area.
Town staff have proposed allowing accessory apartments and duplex varieties for all residential zoning districts. Miller-Foushee believed that neighborhoods and communities will be able to handle this change. She drew on her personal experience living next door to a duplex of graduate students who are wonderful neighbors. She was proud to welcome additional families into her community through Habitat for Humanity duplexes, among other initiatives. She hoped that community members would see these changes as an opportunity to provide more housing choices and types for fellow members of the community. Miller-Foushee noted that cottages on compact lots were largely designed for seniors seeking to downscale into a community of smaller homes on a plot of land normally zoned for just one house.
Miller-Foushee anticipated the question as to how these changes would impact the character of neighborhoods and communities. She displayed slides showing these alternative housing designs being very much integrated into the overall appearance of neighboring single-family homes. She said that the Town would rewrite amendments thoughtfully to accommodate new housing choices to be in character with other characteristics of each neighborhood.
Miller-Foushee took a moment to consider chat questions. She said that the Town does not have the power to mandate who can live where or what they can do with their property. The Town does have very robust affordable housing efforts, with last year having the largest single allocation in a given year towards affordable housing.
She was pleased to work with Town staff, and greatly looked forward to the opportunity to work with UNC Health’s potential commitment of $5 million towards an affordable housing revolving loan fund. She noted a common desire to retain talented workers in town so that folks do not have to commute long distances. Miller-Foushee said that the average commute to Chapel Hill can be an hour or more, meaning that in many ways local traffic is snarled by the over 40,000 commuters who venture in and out of town each day.
Miller-Foushee offered to answer questions from listeners. She recalled that Empowerment Inc. is currently holding a fundraiser to build the Peach Apartments, which will contain ten affordable units at 30% AMI, which would serve the most vulnerable of community members earning around $9/hour. She hoped that meeting attendees would also purchase tickets for this event, which is one of the newest developments and investments in the Town’s historically African-American community.
The Chair said that she was mystified as to the opposition to these proposals. She asked if Miller-Foushee could speak in more detail about the source of this opposition. Miller-Foushee said that Town staff have really worked to listen to local communities and have found that many people are afraid that these proposals will have a negative impact on their neighborhoods. She said that data indicates that communities that would have the most unintended negative impacts are those that are already vulnerable. She cited the Northside neighborhood as an example of a conservation district open to these changes.
Arlene Medder asked if Miller-Foushee had any data regarding how Airbnb and investors buying houses impacts housing shortages locally. Miller-Foushee did not have any exact data on this subject, but she said that Airbnb’s have been in Chapel Hill for the past few years without issues. She said that Airbnb really offers community members options that do not exist because of the dearth of local hotels.
Medder clarified that Airbnb’s are said to not have people living in them and are used strictly as a short-term rental property. Miller-Foushee understood that one must be dwelling in a property at least 60% of the time to operate it as an Airbnb, although the state may change these rules.
Tracy Wetherby Williams asked about the concern that historically Black neighborhoods would be gentrified under the middle housing ordinances discussed earlier. Miller-Foushee said that such gentrification is already taking place in her historically Black neighborhood, among others in town. She observed that the signs opposing the proposed ordinances are being placed in well-to-do neighborhoods outside these historically Black communities.
Wetherby Williams asked how such an unintended consequence could be mitigated. Miller-Foushee said that the Town is looking at limiting permits per year to see what may happen in these communities. She noted other concerns about students intruding into neighborhoods and said that in a college town, students are always a natural factor. A balance of factors needs to be found, she said. Miller-Foushee noted the practice of the Town to make policy adjustments in light of potential or unintended consequences.
The Chair noted the Town’s ordinance to limit the number of non-related individuals who can live in one dwelling. She confirmed that this ordinance is intended to limit the number of students in each unit. She further confirmed that this limit is not planned to change as part of the missing middle reforms that Miller-Foushee discussed earlier.
The Chair thanked Miller-Foushee for taking the time to speak with the committee. She thought this information would be helpful to center thoughts around housing and affordable housing in Chapel Hill. The discussion would also aid the Forum in its efforts to advocate for staff access to local affordable housing near where we work. Miller-Foushee said that she was particularly excited to move the Town away from the exclusionary zoning practices that have been steeped in discriminatory housing practices, such as redlining. She was enthusiastic about providing housing choices for communities at UNC to be able to live in Chapel Hill.
Annetta Streater asked if the slides presented were available on the Town website. Miller-Foushee confirmed that they are indeed there, among other materials connected to affordable housing.
The Chair called for a motion to approve the April minutes of the committee. David Bragg made this motion, seconded by Arlene Medder. The motion was approved without opposition or abstention.
Matt Banks presented the Forum’s monthly budget report, which detailed expenses of the current fiscal year and the zeroing out of proposed expenditures as the year ends. He noted a couple of expenditures which have not yet been confirmed that he would follow up on soon. Arlene Medder asked if the website redesign proposal would be carried over to the next year. The Chair said that this carryover money would likely be retained into the next fiscal year.
The Chair presented a proposed Forum budget for fiscal year 2023-24. This proposal increased blood drive support funding in response to delegate comments at the last Executive Committee meeting.
The Chair thought the time was right to seek a return of funding for the Forum budget to pre-pandemic levels. Should this proposal be rejected, the Forum could readjust its request accordingly. She asked committee chairs to notify her of potential changes in their groups’ budgets. Otherwise, she suggested tentatively moving this request forward to the OHR Business Office. Arlene Medder made this motion, seconded by Annetta Streater. The motion was approved without opposition or abstention.
The committee took time to discuss the arrangements for the Forum officer elections at the June 14th general meeting. The Chair thanked Laura Pratt and Matthew Teal for taking the lead in this planning. Pratt recalled the Qualtrics form needed for the vote and the need for a list of incoming, outgoing, and continuing delegates eligible to vote. Pratt and Teal agreed to create a process overview document to assist future years’ planning of this effort.
The committee decided, after consultation with Forum Parliamentarian Jacob Womack, that voting for the open Staff Assembly two-year delegate position would determine the alternate representative to that body. Keith Hines noted that the Forum’s practice should conform with Staff Assembly guidelines in this area.
The Chair encouraged committee members to participate in upcoming meetings regarding Forum Bylaws revisions to capture these changes, among other potential revisions discussed recently. Jacob Womack said that the Forum would need to be presented Bylaws changes as a whole, after which they could then be potentially broken down into individual revisions for consideration by the body. The Chair asked if it might be easier to do the entire process piecemeal from the start. Womack recalled the need to approve the Forum’s standing rules document at the upcoming June and July meetings. Following this step, the Forum could then move forward with adjusting its Bylaws.
The Chair asked committee members their preferences for the Forum’s Annual Retreat. The committee eventually decided to hold the retreat in two half-day sessions, on July 12th and 13th. The first half-day will feature teambuilding sessions at the Outdoor Education Center. The second half-day will be devoted to business of the Forum to be conducted over Zoom. The Chair proposed to survey delegates to confirm their interest in this format and their ability to attend these dates. She asked Matt Banks to produce this survey for a future meeting of the Membership & Assignments committee on this matter.
The Chair reminded Forum committee chairs that annual reports for their committees are due just before the June 20 Executive committee meeting. The full Executive committee will work on an overall annual report once these are prepared and distributed. The Chair hoped the Forum would be able to vote on the full annual report at the July retreat.
The Chair outlined the tentative plan for the June 14th general meeting, noting that the meeting will likely feature a very full agenda. She also noted the scheduled [and subsequently postponed] June 8th Vice Chancellors’ representatives’ meeting for which Matt Banks will distribute a call for attendees and topics via Qualtrics soon.
Joe Ormond reported that the Communications and Public Relations committee will likely meet in the next week to discuss the future publication of InTouch, the Forum newsletter. The Chair noted that the committee only does one InTouch publication each summer. There was no report from the Forum Book Club.
Jacob Womack reported that there were no updates from the Community Service committee. Arlene Medder reported that harvesting is underway at the Carolina Community Garden. She hoped to consult with Garden officials regarding its proposed survey. The committee briefly discussed holding its outdoor retreat session at the Garden.
Laura Pratt reported that the Carolina Blood Drive had been very successful, collecting 556 units of blood. The Blood Drive committee has a scheduled debrief on Thursday to consider feedback about the drive. She thanked all who donated or volunteered. The Chair thanked Pratt and Amber Meads for their work as committee co-chairs of this effort.
Janet Steele and Rebecca Howell had no updates for the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion committee beyond identifying a potential co-chair for the new academic year.
L.E. Alexander said that the Education and Career Development committee is collecting Carolina Family Scholarship applications. The committee has engaged two teaching faculty members as readers for this effort. The committee asked Matt Banks to send a reminder to staff regarding the Carolina Family Scholarship application process. The Chair confirmed that the Forum last year awarded eight scholarships worth $2,000 each.
Professional Development Grant applications will open June 1st. L.E. asked if the Chair had heard anything concerning the staff award to be funded by the Department of Computer Science. The Chair recalled that the effort awaits building up the endowment funding for the award.
Leah Hefner said that the Personnel Issues committee was working to follow legislative developments related to staff, as well as local affordable housing concerns. She was pleased to hear from Town Council member Miller-Foushee. The Chair asked Matthew Teal if any progress had occurred with the university’s proposed ethics statement. Teal did not know but noted that Kim Strom will soon step down as head of Ethics, Integrity, and Policy Management. Preparing for this change had taken up most of his time recently.
The Chair noted that the Recognition and Awards committee will distribute its peer recognition awards at the June 14th general meeting, in addition to the Kay Wijnberg Hovious Outstanding Delegate Awards. The committee will soon meet to decide the eventual winner of the Rebecca Clark Staff Award for Moral Courage. Peer recognition winners are now being vetted by OHR. She thanked all who participated in the committee’s consideration of candidates, particularly reading through the 230 pages of nominations. Matt Banks apologized to Randall Borror for inadvertently leaving him off the Outlook invitation for that meeting.
Keith Hines said that the UNC System Staff Assembly had heard a proposed proclamation regarding compelled speech that would likely not move forward and would be tabled probably until October. Hines noted that the Chancellors’ Cup golf tournament will be held in Greensboro this September. Employees can volunteer for this effort using work time.
The Chair said that the Advisory Committee on Transportation and Parking will meet the following day. David Bragg said that the Student Stores Advisory Committee had met, with a focus on urging professors to adopt their textbooks earlier in the year. Matthew Teal recalled that the Policy Review committee had worked to rewrite the university’s policy on privacy of electronic information to improve the policy’s readability.
Rebecca Howell cited Sidney Truehart as an exceptionally helpful Student Stores employee who assisted her work during the recent Commencement weekend. She commended their work and the work of bookstore staff this year. Discussion briefly turned to Maple View Farm’s banana pudding ice cream. In the absence of further discussion, the meeting adjourned by motion of Rebecca Howell, seconded by Arlene Medder. The motion was approved unanimously, and the meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted, Matt Banks, Recording Secretary