texas state affordable housing corporation board …...2006/10/13 · texas state affordable...

Official Board Packet

Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation

Board Meeting

To be held at the offices of Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation

1005 Congress Avenue – Suite B-10 Conference Room Austin Texas 78701

Friday, October 13, 2006 10:30 a.m.

BOARD MEETING TEXAS STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION

To be held at the offices of Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation

1005 Congress Avenue – Suite B-10 Conference Room Austin, Texas 78701

October 13, 2006 at 10:30 am

AGENDA CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL Jerry Romero CERTIFICATION OF QUORUM Chair The Board of Directors of Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation will meet to consider and possibly act on the following: PUBLIC COMMENT REPORTS

♦ Audit Committee Report Thomas Leeper ♦ President’s Report David Long ♦ Executive Vice President’s Report Katherine Closmann ♦ Single Family Lending Report Paige McGilloway ♦ Financial Report Melinda Smith

♦ Presentation of Financial Statements and Budget Report ACTION ITEMS IN OPEN MEETING Tab 1 Presentation, Discussion and Possible Approval of Minutes of the Board Meeting held on September 8,

2006. Tab 2 Review and Discussion of the Proposals Received for Underwriter Services in Support of the Corporation’s

Single Family Drawdown Bond Program. Tab 3 Presentation, Discussion and Possible Approval for Publication and Comment Proposed Guidelines and

Criteria, Including the Identification of Targeted Areas of Housing Need, for the 2007 Multifamily Housing Private Activity Bond Program.

CLOSED MEETING Consultation with legal counsel on legal matters – Texas Government Code § 551.071 Deliberation regarding purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property – Texas Government Code § 551.072 Deliberation regarding prospective gift or donation to the state or Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation – Texas Government Code § 551.073 Personnel Matters – Texas Government Code § 551.074 Implementation of security personnel or devices – Texas Government Code § 551.076 Other matters authorized under the Texas Government Code OPEN MEETING Action in Open Meeting on Items Discussed in Closed Meeting ADJOURN Individuals who require auxiliary aids or services for this meeting should contact Laura Ross, ADA Responsible Employee, at 512-477-3555, x 400 or Relay Texas at 1-800-735-2989 at least two days before the meeting so that the appropriate arrangements can be made. Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation reserves the right to recess this meeting (without adjourning) and convene at a later stated time, if and to the extent allowed by law. If Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation adjourns this meeting and reconvenes at a later time, the later meeting will be held in the same location as this meeting. Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation also reserves the right to proceed into a closed meeting during the meeting in accordance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code. If permitted by the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551 of the Texas Government Code, any item on this Agenda to be discussed in open meeting may also be discussed by the Board (and any other authorized persons) in closed meeting.

Audit Committee Report

Discussion

President’s Report

Discussion

Executive Vice President’s Report

Discussion

Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation'sProfessional Educators Home Loan Program Series 2006A

As of February 28, 2006 through September 27, 2006

Month# of

Loans

% ofTotal

LoansTotal

Originated At a Glance Jan-06 1 1% 105,785$ Total Amount Originated $21,657,142Feb-06 1 1% 161,456$ Average Monthly Income $4,223Mar-06 31 17% 3,555,753$ Average Purchase Price $122,352Apr-06 57 31% 6,635,253$ Average Loan Amount $118,345May-06 75 41% 8,951,099$ Average Household Size 2Jun-06 13 7% 1,740,631$ New/ExistingJul-06 5 3% 507,165$ Existing 60%

Totals 183 100% 21,657,142$ New 40%Professional Breakdown

Lender Originated # of Loans Total % Teacher 96.53%Wells Fargo Bank NA $3,212,166 27 15% Teacher Aide 1.98%

Countrywide Funding Corp. $2,314,748 22 12% School Counselor 0.99%DHI Mortgage Company $1,943,912 14 8% School Nurse 0.50%

Market Street Mortgage Corp. $1,667,247 14 8% School Librarian 0.00%Colonial Savings, F.A. $1,589,554 13 7% Type of Loan

Universal American Mortgage Co $1,364,886 11 6% FHA 68%Cornerstone Mortgage Company $1,205,662 11 6% FNMA 31%SFMC, LP fka Service First Mtg $1,106,217 9 5% VA 0.55%

Wachovia Mortgage Corporation $890,134 8 4% USDA-RD 0.55%CTX Mortgage Corporation $867,306 7 4% EthnicityWR Starkey Mortgage, LLC $837,840 7 4% Not specified 72%

Rocky Mountain Mortgage $518,825 4 2% White, not of Hispanic origin 21%McAfee Mortgage & Investments $486,065 5 3% Hispanic 3%

Willow Bent Mortgage $485,400 4 2% African American 2%Prime Lending, Incorporated $423,583 3 2% Asian, South Pacific 2%

Home Loan Corporation $423,277 4 2% Top Origination Locations # of LoansHammersmith Financial Corp. $376,600 3 2% AUSTIN 17

Texas Capital $373,588 3 2% HOUSTON 16Valley Mortgage Corporation $306,073 3 2% SAN ANTONIO 14

Residential Home Lending $303,464 3 2% FORT WORTH 12Milestone Mortgage Corporation $261,008 2 1% CYPRESS 6

Ryland $156,005 1 1% ROUND ROCK 5NTFN Inc./Premier Mortgage $129,958 1 1% DALLAS 5

Bankers Financial $128,448 1 1% ARLINGTON 5Legacy Financial Group $117,000 1 1% SPRING 4

Home Trust Company $104,176 1 1% MESQUITE 4Castle & Cook Mortgage $64,000 1 1% KYLE 4

Total Committed $21,657,142 183 100% KATY 4HUMBLE 3

Total Allocation $23,809,000 GRAND PRAIRIE 3Remaining to Commit $2,151,858 BURLESON 3

Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation'sProfessional Educators Home Loan Program Series 2006A

As of February 28, 2006 through September 27, 2006

Monthly Origination

1 1 31 57 75 13 5 183$0

$5,000,000

$10,000,000

$15,000,000

$20,000,000

$25,000,000

Jan-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 Apr-06 May-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 Totals

Bond ClosedFebruary 28, 2006

Occupational Origination Amounts

$20,886,600.00

$142,608.00$261,401.00

$366,533.00

$0.00

TeacherTeacher AideSchool CounselorSchool LibrarianSchool Nurse

Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation'sFire Fighter and Law Enforcement or Security Officer Home Loan Program Series 2006B

As of June 15, 2006 through October 4, 2006

Month# of

Loans

% ofTotal

LoansTotal

Originated At a Glance Jun-06 28 21% 3,241,903$ Total Amount Originated $14,207,041Jul-06 29 22% 3,263,792$ Average Monthly Income $3,998

Aug-06 39 29% 3,896,738$ Average Purchase Price $107,918Sep-06 33 25% 3,428,325$ Average Loan Amount $106,023Oct-06 5 4% 376,283$ Average Household Size 2

Totals 134 100% 14,207,041$ New/ExistingExisting 71%

Lender Originated # of Loans Total % New 29%Countrywide Funding Corp. $2,216,937 24 18% Professional Breakdown

Wells Fargo Bank NA $1,830,770 17 13% Correctional Officer 29%Market Street Mortgage $752,065 5 4% Peace Officer 41%

WR Starkey Mortgage, LLC $737,154 9 7% Fire Fighter 26%CTX Mortgage Corporation $714,891 5 4% County Jailer 4%

First Magnus Financial $689,920 6 4% Public Security Officer 0%Cornerstone Mortgage Company $652,051 6 4% Type of LoanSFMC, LP fka Service First Mtg. $553,981 5 4% FHA 65%

NTFN Inc./Premier Mortgage $538,142 4 3% FNMA 25%McAfee Mortgage & Investments $498,162 5 4% VA 10%

Wachovia Mortgage Corp. $489,727 5 4% USDA-RD 0%Valley Mortgage Corporation $455,987 4 3% Ethnicity

DHI Mortgage Company $381,632 3 2% Not specified 65%New Century Mortgage $350,435 3 2% White, not of Hispanic origin 25%

First Continental Mortgage $311,525 2 1% Hispanic 7%Milestone Mortgage Corporation $307,563 3 2% African American 1%

Prime West Mortgage $283,842 4 3% Asian, South Pacific 1%Willow Bend Mtg $258,400 2 1% Top Origination Locations # of Loans

Universal American Mortgage Co. $252,277 2 1% SAN ANTONIO 5Republic Mortgage Home Loans $213,449 2 1% HOUSTON 5

Home Loan Corporation $203,000 2 1% FORT WORTH 5Happy State Bank $189,350 2 1% AMARILLO 5

National City Mortgage Co. $170,651 3 2% BEEVILLE 4American Home Mortgage Corp. $163,905 1 1% KYLE 3

Hammersmith Financial Corp. $144,600 1 1% WILLIS 2Residential Home Lending $137,500 1 1% WAXAHACHIE 2

1st National Bank dba 1st Community $131,929 2 1% SAN JUAN 2Home Trust Company $114,207 1 1% ROUND ROCK 2

First United Bank & Trust $107,500 1 1% PANHANDLE 2Rocky Mountain Mortgage Co. $92,000 1 1% KILLEEN 2

Realty Mortgage $91,774 1 1% FORNEY 2New South Federal Savings Bank $89,500 1 1% EL PASO 2

Maverick Mortgage $82,215 1 1% CYPRESS 2Total Committed $14,207,041 134 100% CONROE 2

BAYTOWN 2Total Allocation $23,640,000 ARLINGTON 2

Remaining to Commit $9,432,959

Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation'sFire Fighter and Law Enforcement or Security Officer Home Loan Program Series 2006B

As of June 15, 2006 through October 4, 2006

Monthly Origination

28 29 39 33 5 134$0

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

$10,000,000

$12,000,000

$14,000,000

$16,000,000

Jun-06 Jul-06 Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Totals

Bond ClosedJune 15, 2006

Occupational Origination Amounts

370,649.00

6,691,509.65

3,870,140.00

0.00

3,274,742.00

Correctional OfficerPeace OfficerFire FighterCounty JailerPublic Security Officer

Ì®»

¿«®

§ Ç

·»´¼

Ý«®

ª» Ý

±³°¿

®·±

²

Texa

s Sta

te A

ffor

dabl

e H

ousi

ng

BOARD MEETING TEXAS STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION

Held at the Offices of Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation

1005 Congress Avenue – Suite B-10 Conference Room Austin Texas 78701

September 8, 2006 at 10:30 am

Summary of Minutes Call to Order, Roll Call Certification of Quorum The Board Meeting of the Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation (the “Corporation”) was called to order by Jerry Romero, Chair, at 10:35 a.m., on August 11, 2006, at the offices of Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation, 1005 Congress Avenue – Suite B-10 Conference Room, Austin, TX 78701. Roll Call certified that a quorum was present. Members Present Jerry Romero, Chair Thomas A. Leeper, Vice Chair Jesse A. Coffey, Member Charles G. Rencher, Member Jo Van Hovel, Member Staff Present David Long, President Katherine Closmann, Executive Vice President Melinda Smith, Chief Financial Officer Paige McGilloway, Single Family Programs Manager Janie Taylor, Manager of Marketing and Development Emily Lah, Asset Oversight & Compliance Manager Joshua Schirr, Asset Oversight & Compliance Specialist Laura Ross, Corporate Secretary Public Comment Public comment was not given. Special Guests Bob Dransfield, Fulbright & Jaworski Rob Dubbelde, Greenberg Traurig Laura Laury, Citimortgage Gary Machak, RBC Dain Rauscher Robin Miller, First Southwest Company Chris Spelbring, Morgan Keegan Reports

2

President’s Report Mr. Long began by making the Board aware of who was in attendance at the meeting. Mr. Long then announced that the Corporation had two new staff members, Mr. Schirr and Ms. Taylor. Mr. Long turned the Board’s attention to the State Low Income Housing Plan and the 13 consolidated public hearings that would occur across the state. Mr. Long informed the Board that staff would be participating in the hearings and taking public comment on the programs at that time. Mr. Long made the Board aware that he and Ms. Closmann met with legislative staff and would set up more meetings over the next few months leading up to the legislative session. Mr. Long asked for the Board Members’ participation and feedback. Mr. Long informed the Board that staff would be attending several conferences and meetings in the coming month. Executive Vice President’s Report Ms. Closmann began by welcoming Ms. Taylor, the Corporation’s new Manager of Marketing and Development. Ms. Closmann then turned the Board’s attention to the default notices that were handed out to the Board and included in the board packet. Ms. Closmann proceeded to go through and discuss the notices with the Board. Ms. Closmann then turned the Board’s attention to the news article that was provided regarding Bent Creek and Creekwood Apartments. Ms. Closmann thanked Mr. Coffey for sending staff the articles. Ms. Closmann explained that the article dealt mostly with the lawsuit filed by American Housing Foundation (AHF) against the City of Dallas. Ms. Closmann informed the Board that she had spoken with Mr. Steve Wakefield, President of the Lake Highlands Area Improvement Association, and he expressed an interest in coming to give public comment with regard to this issue at the October Board Meeting. Ms. Closmann pointed out to the Board that one of the default notices was for AHF. Ms. Closmann refreshed the Board’s memory of the Fee Payment Agreement that guaranteed payment of the Corporation’s fees should they not be paid out of the waterfall. Ms. Closmann stated that staff had not received the payment that was due on September 1st so a notice had been issued that day. Ms. Closmann stated her hope that the fees would be collected shortly. Discussion followed. Single Family Lending Report Ms. McGilloway began by reporting that she had attended the August meeting of the Huntsville Board of Realtors, where she made a presentation on the single family programs. Ms. McGilloway thanked Mr. Leeper for attending. Ms. McGilloway stated that at the meeting she had spoken with the lenders about what was and wasn’t working for them. Ms. McGilloway stated that she also had a brief tour of the areas of Huntsville where they were doing green building initiatives.

3

Ms. McGilloway informed the Board that she had attended two classes during the previous month: Combating Predatory Lending and Credit Counseling for Maximum Results. Ms. McGilloway informed the Board that staff had submitted to the Bond Review Board (BRB) an application for allocation of $100 million for the Professional Educators Home Loan Program. Ms. McGilloway stated the uncertain odds of the Corporation receiving the allocation due to the requests that were ahead of the Corporation’s, but noted that staff had explored every available option to get more funding. Ms. McGilloway stated that the Corporation’s application for BRB Board approval of the $25 million to serve borrowers at 80 percent area median family income or below had been submitted. Ms. McGilloway announced that the name of the program would be the Home Sweet Loan Program. Ms. McGilloway made the Board aware that she had conducted 2 internal trainings for staff regarding the single family programs so that staff would feel more comfortable answering the questions posed by people who called about the programs. Ms. McGilloway reported that she would be making a presentation at the next meeting of Austin’s chapter of the National Association of Professional Mortgage Women, and that Ms. Taylor would also be attending. Ms. McGilloway stated that a TEFRA Hearing was scheduled for September 19th with regard to the Home Sweet Loan Program. Ms. McGilloway then turned the Board’s attention to the reports included in the board packet. Ms. McGilloway noted that on average the Homes for Heroes program was originating $4 million per month. Ms. McGilloway pointed out that in response to the request at last month’s meeting, she had included a map with 2005 and 2006 loans noted and broken out across the state. Mr. Romero inquired as to how long the remaining funds for the Homes for Heroes program would last and Ms. McGilloway stated that she thought they would last through the end of the year. Ms. McGilloway stated that if the funds didn’t last, those that were 80 percent and below could utilize the Home Sweet Loan Program. Mr. Long followed by stating that additional funds had not been applied for because of the Home Sweet Loan Program. Mr. Romero inquired when the Corporation would hear whether we had received the $100 million and Mr. Long stated that he did not know, that it depended on the status of the applications ahead of the Corporation’s. Ms. McGilloway stated that the BRB maintained a spreadsheet on their website which was updated daily to reflect the status of the applications. Ms. Van Hovel asked whether more new lenders were becoming involved in the programs and Ms. McGilloway stated that many smaller lenders were signing up, which helped to serve the areas where larger lenders were not present. Mr. Long noted that an open invitation to lenders to participate could be found on the Corporation’s website. Discussion followed regarding lender requirements and participation. Marketing and Development Report

4

Mr. Romero welcomed Ms. Janie Taylor to the Corporation. Ms. Taylor stated that she looked forward to working with the Board. Ms. Taylor stated that she had begun to develop a marketing plan for the Affordable Homeownership Program for Texas. Ms. Taylor stated that she was hoping to utilize unpaid advertising which would include stories in either the paper or news media. Ms. Taylor stated her desire to pitch footage of the first borrower’s closing to the media outlets in the Brownsville area where the borrower live. Ms. Taylor also stated that a public service announcement (PSA) could be done on the program, with the inclusion of the same footage for radio or TV. Ms. Taylor suggested marketing to realtors and home builders, as well as to those renting. Ms. Taylor stated her excitement for the Home Sweet Loan Program and noted that she was currently working on how to announce that program to the public. Ms. Taylor reported that she would be attending the Greenlights Conference, as well as a class sponsored by Greenlights devoted to grant writing so that she could begin looking at different grants with different foundations. Ms. Taylor noted that previous to the Corporation she worked on the other side of the process where she helped determine who would receive grants and funds and had retained her contacts at bigger corporations and companies. Ms. Taylor stated that she looked forward to getting in front of the decision makers at those organizations and telling them about the Corporation. Ms. Taylor informed the Board that she would be attending the National Council of State Housing Agencies (NCSHA) conference and the Campaign for Affordable Housing Conference in Houston. Ms. Taylor stated that staff was looking forward to setting up meetings with legislators to let them know what we’re doing and reminding them of the things that have been successful for us. Ms. Taylor also stated that as session begins she and Ms. Ross would be tracking legislation and getting that information to the Board. Mr. Rencher inquired what type of marketing plan she was working on, and Ms. Taylor stated that it was focused on the Affordable Homeownership Program and that later she hoped to work on a marketing plan devoted to the Corporation as a whole. Mr. Long noted that she had a budget set up for marketing and Ms. Taylor followed that she hoped to begin with focusing on unpaid advertisements. Mr. Romero stated his happiness that Ms. Taylor would be working with staff during session and requested that if the Board Members were in contact with their local representatives and senators to please contact them so that there would be an opportunity to introduce them to Ms. Taylor. Mr. Romero inquired whether she would be developing a checklist so that every time a new bond program was released or a story needed to be shared, a PSA or story could be released. Ms. Taylor agreed that this needed to be put in place. Ms. Taylor noted a need for the Corporation to continue to be in the spotlight and keep the public informed about what the Corporation was doing. Ms. Taylor stated that PSAs were great for this. Ms. Taylor continued to discuss her ideas for marketing the Corporation and its programs.

5

Mr. Rencher suggested that Ms. Taylor look into the early morning talk shows and Access TV. Ms. Taylor stated that she would look into these and hopefully have the Board Members represent the Corporation in their areas of the state. Asset Oversight & Compliance Report Ms. Lah began by introducing Mr. Joshua Schirr, the Corporation’s new Asset Oversight and Compliance Specialist. Mr. Schirr stated his happiness to be here and that he looked forward to working with staff and the Board. Ms. Lah then turned the Board’s attention to the quarterly compliance report that was included in the board packet. Ms. Lah pointed out that Ashton Place was short one unit at the end of the second quarter, but had since resolved that issue. Ms. Lah also noted that Chelsea Court was short four units, but noted the property had recently switched management companies so they were unsure if their reports were accurate. Ms. Lah stated that staff was working with them to get everything back on track. Ms. Lah then turned the Board’s attention to the Resident Services report. Ms. Lah pointed out that NHT GTEX was not doing much in the way of services but this was because of the recent change in management companies. Ms. Lah also pointed out that American Opportunity for Housing (AOH) properties were not providing services. Ms. Lah explained that though AOH had been sent several letters and the properties had briefly begun to provide services, they had since stopped. Ms. Lah stated that staff was working to get them back up in running with their resident services. Ms. Van Hovel inquired as to why more people didn’t attend Crime Watch. Ms. Lah explained that more people attended when the property had issues with crime. Discussion followed. Mr. Rencher inquired whether staff informed the properties of which services were successful and which were not. Ms. Lah explained that staff sent a quarterly newsletter to the properties and owners that offered suggestions for zero cost resident services, as well as spotlighted a different property every month for their resident services. Ms. Lah informed the Board that staff had also held workshops at the properties to discuss resident services and provide suggestions. Ms. Lah then turned the Board’s attention to the August 1st murder that occurred at Bent Creek Apartments. Ms. Lah noted that it was still under investigation so she had not received a police report, however she did speak with Mr. Sterquell at AHF who provided information about the murder. Ms. Lah proceeded to read an account of what happened, noting that all involved were non-residents and the criminals had been caught immediately. Ms. Lah informed the Board that in November she and her staff would be attending the RADAR: Realistic Approaches to Drug and Alcohol Reduction 2-day workshop. Ms. Lah stated that it was for low income properties suffering from drug and alcohol issues. Ms. Lah noted the program’s success in different cities and properties across the country. Ms. Lah informed the Board that information about the conference had been sent to all the properties, asking for staff to attend. Mr. Romero asked if there was time during site visits to go over information learned at these conferences and Ms. Lah stated that time was set aside to do this, as well as review findings assessed during the visit.

6

Ms. Van Hovel inquired how residents were informed of the resident services and Ms. Lah stated that they were informed through fliers and monthly newsletters generated by the property’s management. Financial Report Ms. Smith began by turning the Board’s attention to the financial reports included in the board packet and noting that as of July 31st the Corporation had a cash basis profit of $224,848. Ms. Smith then proceeded to briefly discuss the overages that had occurred and the deviations from the budget. Mr. Romero inquired about IT expenses and Ms. Smith stated that she did not anticipate any major IT purchases in the coming year. Mr. Romero inquired if a reserve fund had been established and Ms. Smith reported that $500 was put aside every month for that purpose. Discussion followed. Ms. Smith then handed out a timeline for the audit. Ms. Smith said that staff was currently working to prepare for the audit. Ms. Smith requested that the Audit Committee meet prior to each of the next few Board meetings so that the auditor could provide them with progress reports. Tab 1 Presentation, Discussion and Possible Approval of Minutes of the Board

Meeting held on August 11, 2006. Mr. Leeper made a motion to approve the minutes of the Board Meeting held on August 11, 2006. Mr. Rencher seconded the motion. Ms. Van Hovel abstained. Motion passed. Tab 2 Presentation, Discussion and Possible Approval of a Resolution Authorizing

the Issuance, Sale and Delivery of Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds, Series 2006C; Authorizing a Trust Indenture, an Origination, Sale and Servicing Agreement, a Bond Purchase Agreement and Continuing Disclosure Agreement, Making Certain Findings and Determinations; Authorizing the Execution of Documents and Instruments Necessary or Convenient to Carry Out a 2006C Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation Single Family Program; and Containing Other Matters Incident and Related Thereto.

Ms. McGilloway began by introducing the professionals that were in attendance at the meeting. Ms. McGilloway then stated that the resolution before the Board would allow staff to move forward with the 2006C bond transaction, the Texas Home Sweet Loan Program. Ms. McGilloway gave a brief overview of the program. Mr. Dransfield then gave an overview of the program and how it was different from past programs, as well as an overview of the application process. Mr. Machak then turned the Board’s attention to the presentation handout that was provided and briefly discussed the program and its financing. Ms. Van Hovel made a motion to approve a resolution authorizing the issuance, sale and delivery of Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds, Series 2006C; authorizing a Trust Indenture, an Origination, Sale and Servicing Agreement, a Bond Purchase Agreement and Continuing Disclosure Agreement, making certain findings and determinations; authorizing the execution of

7

documents and instruments necessary or convenient to carry out a 2006C Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation Single Family Program; and containing other matters incident and related thereto. Mr. Rencher seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Tab 3 Presentation and Discussion With Regard to the Status of the Single Family

Draw Down/Recycling Facility Program. Ms. McGilloway refreshed the Board’s memory that at the August board meeting, the Board had given staff permission to consider and move forward with a recycling draw down program. Ms. McGilloway stated that the Request for Proposals (RFP) before the Board would be published in the Texas Register and respondents would have 2 weeks to submit a response. Discussion followed regarding the draw down/recycling facility program process. Tab 4 Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Approval of Staff Development of a

Request for Proposals to Allocate the Full Amount of the Corporation’s 2007 Multifamily Private Activity Bond Cap (Approximately $40 million) to a Single Developer for the Purpose of Creating Affordable Multifamily Housing to Meet the Corporation’s Targeted Housing Needs in the State with the Particular Housing Projects to be Approved on a Single Project Basis.

Ms. Closmann began by giving a brief history of the Multifamily Private Activity Bond Program. Ms. Closmann noted the memo included in the board packet, and began to explain how the program could be done in the coming year. Ms. Closmann noted that she was asking for the Board’s approval of staff moving forward with and developing the program. Ms. Closmann stated that staff would work with the Bond Review Board to ensure that its structure was feasible within the program perimeters. Ms. Closmann explained that staff would issue an RFP to developers who, if chosen, would agree to meet the Corporation’s targeted housing needs by using the Corporation’s entire bond cap allocation. Ms. Closmann stated that it was bond counsel’s recommendation that the Corporation split the bond cap between two developers to safeguard against one developer not being able to use it. Ms. Closmann explained that if two developers were chosen and one didn’t use their entire allocation by a certain date, the other developer could use it if they had viable projects in the pipeline. Ms. Closmann briefly explained what the proposals would be evaluated on. Ms. Closmann stated that after the developer was chosen through the RFP process, the developer and Corporation’s staff would work together to bring appropriate developments to the Board for selection at which time the Board would first evaluate and then select the developments. Ms. Closmann continued to explain what would happen from that point on. Mr. Romero stated that he would like to see the existing program changed so that funds could be more utilized. Mr. Coffey inquired about the developers that would be considered and Ms. Closmann confirmed that the developers’ capacity to build multifamily housing would have to be considered. Discussion followed. Mr. Miller with First Southwest Company, the Corporation’s Financial Advisor, weighed in to say that he thought it was the best option for the Corporation. Mr. Miller also noted that the Corporation was not the only one having problems creating multifamily deals. Discussion followed. Ms. Closmann stated that if the proposal was approved by the Board, staff would come back in October with guidelines and a draft RFP. Ms. Closmann noted that an RFP would likely be issued in November to give the developers a couple of months to respond.

8

Mr. Rencher inquired about the marketing of this RFP, and Ms. Closmann stated that it would be sent out to the Texas Association of Affordable Housing Providers and other organizations who were involved in multifamily housing. Ms. Closmann also requested that if the Board Members knew of developers who would be interested, to please let them know about the program. Ms. Closmann stated that notice of the RFP would be published in the Texas Register. Mr. Rencher made a motion to approve staff development of a Request for Proposals to allocate the full amount of the Corporation’s 2007 Multifamily Private Activity bond cap (approximately $40 million) to a single developer for the purpose of creating affordable multifamily housing to meet the Corporation’s targeted housing needs in the state with the particular housing projects to be approved on a single project basis. Mr. Coffey seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. A brief recess was taken at 12:00 pm. The meeting resumed at 12:10 pm Tab 5 Presentation, Discussion, and Possible Approval of Staff Development of a

Multifamily Affordable Student Housing Bond Program and the Development of a Request for Proposals to Underwriters to be the Program’s Primary Underwriter.

This item was pulled. Tab 6 Presentation, Discussion and Possible Approval of the Texas State

Affordable Housing Corporation Draft 2007 Annual Action Plan. Mr. Long informed the Board that before them was a draft of the Corporation’s Annual Action Plan, which outlined what programs the Corporation offered. Mr. Long stated that with the approval of the Board, the draft would be sent to the Department of Housing and Community Affairs (TDHCA) who would coordinate the statewide consolidated public hearings. Mr. Long stated that based on comments given during the hearings and via the website where a copy would be posted, the Plan would be revised and brought back before the Board for their approval. Mr. Long explained that after this occurred it would be resubmitted to TDHCA who would then incorporate it into the State Low Income Housing Plan (SLIHP) along with information from TDHCA and the Office of Rural Community Affairs (ORCA). Mr. Long stated the hearings would run from September 21st until October 10th and would occur throughout the state. Mr. Long noted a mistake on page 8 of the Plan included in the board packet. Mr. Long explained that in the second paragraph on the last line it should read 140% instead of 115%. Mr. Romero inquired about what had changed in the plan as compared to last year’s and Mr. Long stated that it incorporated changes to existing programs as well as the addition of new programs. Discussion followed. Mr. Rencher made a motion to approve the Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation’s Draft 2007 Annual Action Plan. Mr. Romero seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Open Meeting

9

After discussion, it was determined that the next few board meetings would occur on October 13th, November 10th, and December 15th. It was noted that Audit Committee meetings would occur in advance of the Board Meetings listed. Adjournment Mr. Leeper made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Van Hovel seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. The Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation Board Meeting was officially adjourned at 12:20 pm. Respectfully submitted by________________________________________________ Laura Ross, Corporate Secretary

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALSTO PROVIDE

UNDERWRITER SERVICES

SINGLE FAMILY DRAWDOWNBOND PROGRAM

(2006)

REQUIREMENTS

PLEASE DELIVER 3 COPIES TO: TEXAS STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION1005 CONGRESS AVENUE, SUITE 500AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701ATTN: MR. DAVID LONG

PLEASE DELIVER 2 COPIES TO: FIRST SOUTHWEST COMPANY300 WEST 6TH STREET, SUITE 1940AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701ATTN: MR. ROBIN MILLER

214-953-4174

RESPONSE DEADLINE

OCTOBER 6, 20065:00 P.M. (CDT)

UNDERWRITER RFP TEXAS STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION

September 22, 2006 Page 2 of 10

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

BACKGROUND OF THE TEXAS STATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION ............. 3

SINGLE FAMILY LOAN PROGRAMS .......................................................................................................... 4

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS-KEY POINTS............................................................................................... 6

SCOPE OF SERVICES........................................................................................................................................... 6

QUESTIONS FOR RESPONDENTS .................................................................................................................. 7

CONFLICT OF INTEREST .................................................................................................................................. 9

RFP REVIEW........................................................................................................................................................... 9

SELECTION CRITERIA........................................................................................................................................ 9

FURTHER INFORMATION .............................................................................................................................. 10

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION ............................................................................................................ 10COSTS INCURRED IN RESPONDINGPROPOSAL ACCEPTANCE PERIODRELEASE OF PROPOSAL RESPONSE AND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION

CERTIFICATION .................................................................................................................................................. 11



BACKGROUND OF THE TEXAS STATE AFFORDABLEHOUSING CORPORATION

The Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation (the “Corporation”) was created by statute in 1994 as a self-sustaining non-profit organization to be operated exclusively for the promotion of public health, safety and welfare through the provision of safe, decent and affordable housing for low-income Texans and other underserved populations. Through the development and administration of innovative and unique housing programs, the Corporation facilitates affordable housing primarily for Texans who do not have comparable options through conventional financial channels. All the Corporation’s programs are offered statewide, with special attention given to rural areas and other select target areas.

The Corporation is organized, operated, and administered in accordance with its enabling legislation. Although the Corporation is legally separate from the State and receives no State appropriated funding, it has legislative authority and is subject to significant State oversight. The Corporation’s bond issuances are subject to debt issuance review and approval by the Texas Bond Review Board and the Texas Attorney General’s office; and the corporate financials are subject to audit by the State Auditor. The Corporation is subject to Sunset review under Chapter 325 of the Texas Government Code (Texas Sunset Act) and will undergo review in 2008.

The Corporation is an approved originating seller/servicer for single family loans with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, GNMA, U.S. Rural Development, FHA, VA, and the Community Development Trust, Inc. The Corporation has conduit sales agreements with Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. and Wells Fargo Funding, and with the Community Development Trust, Inc. for multifamily mortgage loans. The Corporation is also a non-member borrower of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Dallas.

For more general information on the Corporation and its programs, visit the organization’s website at www.tsahc.org.

http://www.tsahc.org



THE CORPORATION’S SINGLE FAMILY LOAN PROGRAMS

Currently $25 million of the state’s private activity bond volume cap is reserved for the Corporation’s Professional Educator Home Loan Program and $25 million is reserved for the Corporation’s Fire Fighter and Law Enforcement or Security Officer Home Loan Program. In addition, for 2006, $25 million of volume cap has been reserved by the Corporation for a “low income” mortgagor statewide program. $5 million of cap is also reserved for a Nursing Faculty Home Loan Program which may have bonds issued with respect to such program in the future.

The proceeds of the single family bond issues are made available statewide through participating lenders. The mortgage loans are offered with 5% down payment assistance derived principally from bond premium. The mortgage loans are securitized and guaranteed by GNMA, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

The Corporation expects to issue $50 million or more of single family long-term bonds in each calendar year beginning in 2007.

The following is a summary of the Corporation’s bond issues outstanding or in the process of being issued:

Series Program Type

InitialPrincipalAmount

Approx.Outstanding

PrincipalAmount

(as of 2/28/06) 2002 Professional Educators $25,000,000 $ 7,585,000 2004B Professional Educators &

Fire Fighters/Security Officers

50,000,000 37,350,000

2005A Professional Educators 23,920,000 23,920,000 2005B Fire Fighters/Security

Officers 20,000,000 20,000,000

2006A Professional Educators 23,809,000 23,809,000 2006B Fire Fighters/Security

Officers 23,640,000 23,640,000

2006C Special Income 23,700,000 Issuance Expected in Oct.

2006



PROPOSALS FOR THE DRAWDOWN PROGRAM

The Corporation will accept proposals from firms interested in providing investment banking services for its Single Family Drawdown Bond Program (the “Drawdown Program”). The Corporation may appoint one or more underwriters for a three-year term with an option to renew such appointment for one-year periods, up to a maximum of five years, to serve as underwriters for the Corporation on the Drawdown Program. The Corporation may designate co-underwriters if it so desires, and may allow for the inclusion of one or more underwriters who bring a unique or creative idea to the Corporation.

The firm or firms, division of duties, and terms of engagement will be decided by the Corporation during the selection process. The Corporation retains the right to, at any time, adjust or modify such retention, division of duties, and the terms of engagement. Any firm selected shall serve at the pleasure of the Corporation.

Proposals must be submitted in the format provided by the Corporation and in accordance with the instructions related to that format.

Three (3) copies of the proposal must be submitted to the Corporation and two (2) copies to the Financial Advisor by 5:00 p.m., Friday, October 6 , 2006. Proposals are to be delivered to:

THE CORPORATION:

Mr. David Long Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation

1005 Congress Avenue, Suite 500 Austin, Texas 78701

FINANCIAL ADVISOR:

Robin Miller First Southwest Company

300 West 6th Street, Suite 1940 Austin, Texas 78701

Firms submitting a response to the Request for Proposal (“RFP”) for Underwriters must agree not to engage in any solicitation or lobbying of the board members of the Corporation concerning appointment or selection as underwriters. Further, the firm agrees that it shall not employ or retain any company or person to solicit or secure an appointment or selection as underwriter for the Corporation, and shall not pay or agree to pay any person, company, corporation, individual, or firm any fee, commission, percentage, gift, or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the appointment or selection of the firm as underwriter for the Corporation. At the discretion of the Corporation, any solicitation or lobbying of board members of the Corporation shall be grounds for the rejection or non-consideration of the firm’s proposal.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL -- KEY POINTS

This RFP does not commit the Corporation to award a contract to a respondent or to pay any costs incurred in the preparation or mailing of a response or in participating in this RFP process. The Corporation reserves the right to waive minor deficiencies and informalities if, in the judgment of the



Corporation, its best interest will be served. In addition, the Corporation reserves the right to accept or reject any or all responses received as a result of this RFP, to obtain information concerning any or all respondents from all sources, and to request an oral presentation from any or all respondents. In addition, the Corporation expressly reserves the right to negotiate with some, all, or none of the respondents with respect to any term or terms of the responses or contracts.

Responses that do not comply with the conditions specified in this RFP may be rejected. The Corporation also may reject a response that does not include all requested information.

The Corporation retains the discretion not to utilize the services of any selected underwriter or to terminate any selected firm without cause and without penalty.

SCOPE OF SERVICES REQUESTED

The Underwriter will be primarily responsible for the following scope of services relating to the issuance of bonds:

1. Assist in the development of the overall bond financing structure and timing. 2. Review and comment on the bond documents, disclosure documents, program

agreements and other documents relating to the drawdown program. 3. Work with the Corporation and its Financial Advisor to develop the underwriting,

distribution and marketing strategy the drawdown program. 4. If a co-underwriter is appointed for the Drawdown Program, ensure a fair and

equitable allocation of bonds among the underwriters. 5. Prepare computer cash flow analyses and tax calculations relating to the Drawdown

Program. (Note that such services may, at the discretion of the Corporation, be provided by the Corporation’s Financial Advisor, legal counsel or other service provider.)

Proposal Submission. Proposals are to be limited to a total of 15 pages, not including a cover letter and appendixes. Appendices should be of reasonable length. Proposals must respond, in sequence, to the questions included. Responses to each question must begin on a new page, with the question (or summary thereof) restated at the top of the page.

Expenses Relating to Proposals. The Corporation will not be liable for any expenses incurred by respondents in replying to this RFP.

Rejection and Negotiation. The Corporation reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to negotiate the terms of the agreement with the selected respondent(s) prior to entering into any engagement letter and/or bond purchase agreement.

QUESTIONS FOR RESPONDENTS

1. Financing Structure. Provide a description of your proposed structure for the Drawdown Program, including the sale and distribution of the related bonds, the tender period for the bonds, the remarketing of the bonds, the interest rate index or other method for establishing the interest rate for the bonds, and other salient features of your proposed program. Discuss the maximum duration of the Drawdown Program, any financial risk to the Corporation, and any qualifications with respect to your commitment to purchase the drawdown bonds during the program’s duration. Discuss your involvement in maintaining 32-year, 10-year and 42-month



tax calculations. Many of the Corporation’s programs are monthly pay bonds and thus will require up to 12 refunding draws per year; describe how your proposal will maximize the efficiency of the drawdown process and minimize the document requirements in connection with each drawdown transaction.

2. Contact Person and Staffing. Provide the name, phone number, email address and fax number of the primary contact person regarding your firm’s proposal. Identify the personnel who would work on the Drawdown Program, and provide a brief resume for each such person describing their experience with respect to single family drawdown bond programs.

3. Qualifications and Experience. In the table below, provide information for the single family drawdown bond programs for which you have served as underwriter or financial advisor or other significant capacity.

Year Issuer Nominal Amount

ProgramTerm

Approx.Drawdown Volume to

Date

Approx. No. of Drawdowns

6. Special Strengths. Describe any special strengths or capabilities of your firm, or any special services or assistance your firm may provide to the Corporation, which you believe may be relevant to or helpful to the Corporation in structuring, financing or administering its Drawdown Program.

7. Proposed Fees and Expenses. Please describe any and all fees and expenses your firm will charge for the establishment and maintenance of the Drawdown Program.

8. Litigation, Investigations and Regulatory Proceedings. Provide a summary of any material inquiries, investigations or litigation occurring during the past three years (including those in progress) regarding the conduct of your firm, your firm’s management, or any employee or official associated with your firm. Describe any related actions taken against your firm or employees by any federal, state or municipal governmental entity or court or regulatory authority, including fines, suspensions, censure, etc.

9. Employment Opportunities. Include a statement addressing the participation of women and minorities. The purpose of this section is to promote economic opportunity by affording equal access to the procurement of agreements for services connected with the financing of bonds by state issuers.

10. References. Provide three references with contact persons and telephone numbers from single family bond issuers (preferably located in Texas).



CONFLICT OF INTEREST

To avoid all possibility of conflict of interest, the underwriter must certify that none of the owners, officers, or stockholders of the underwriter or any affiliate and none of their families are related to any Corporation employee or any member of the Board of Directors.



RFP REVIEW

At a meeting of the Corporation’s Board of Directors, certain respondents may be asked to make oral presentations. If so, those respondents will be given not less than three (3) business days notice along with the date, time and place for the oral presentation. The Corporation staff will assist by preparing summary profiles of each proposal submitted. The Board will make the final selection.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The Corporation will make its selection based upon its perception of the demonstrated competence, financial capability, experience, knowledge and qualifications and on the reasonableness of the proposed fee for underwriting the services. By this RFP, the Corporation has not committed itself to employ an underwriter or underwriters for any or all of the above-described matters.

The Corporation reserves the right to negotiate all elements that comprise the proposal of the respondent to insure that the best possible consideration be afforded to all concerned. The Corporation reserves the right for any reason to reject any and all proposals and to re-solicit.

The Corporation reserves the right to select a respondent for specific purposes or for any combination of specific purposes and to defer the selection of any respondent to a time of the Corporation’s choosing.

FURTHER INFORMATION

To obtain further information about the Corporation or this RFP, you may contact the Corporation’s Financial Advisor, Robin Miller at (214) 953-4174. The Corporation will not accept phone calls relating to this RFP.

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION

Costs Incurred in Responding. All costs directly or indirectly related to preparation of a proposal or any oral presentation required to supplement and/or clarify a proposal which may be required by the Corporation shall be the sole responsibility of and shall be borne by respondent.

Proposal Acceptance Period. All proposals must include a statement that they are valid for a period of one hundred and twenty (120) days subsequent to the submission date.

Release of Proposal Information and Proprietary Information. If a respondent submits proprietary information in the proposal, and does not want it to be disclosed, all proprietary information must be identified and submitted concurrently with submission of the proposal. If the respondent fails to identify proprietary information, submission of the proposal shall cause all such data to be deemed non-proprietary and it will be made available upon public request pursuant to the Open Records Act after the review process has been completed.



CERTIFICATION

The following statement is required to be set forth in your response and signed by an individual authorized to bind your firm.

“I agree to abide by all conditions of this RFP and certify that all information provided in this response is true and correct, that I am authorized to sign this response for the respondent and that the respondent is in compliance with all requirements of the RFP.”

_____________________________ Authorized Signature (Manual)

_____________________________ Printed Name

_____________________________ Title

References will be checked separately.

RESPONSES NOT RECEIVED

AT THE CORPORATION’S OFFICE

BY

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2006

BY 5:00 P.M. (CDT)

WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED

Proposed Guidelines 10-13-06

1

Guidelines for the Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation 2007 Multifamily Housing Private Activity Bond Program

INTRODUCTION

The Texas State Affordable Housing Corporation (the “Corporation”) will be soliciting proposals for multifamily housing properties from developers seeking to use private activity bond cap in the calendar year 2007. Background – Private activity bonds to finance qualified residential rental facilities are subject to the limitations imposed by federal and state regulations including the private activity bond volume allocation cap (“volume cap”). In the 78th Regular Session (2003), the Texas Legislature passed S.B. 284, which, among other purposes, awarded 10 percent (10%) of the State’s multifamily housing volume cap to the Corporation. For 2007, that amount is estimated to be approximately $40 million. The Corporation’s volume cap allocation is not subject to the restrictions of the lottery or the priority process as set forth in Government Code Section 1372.0321. The developer or developers chosen through the request for proposal process will have full access to all or a portion of the Corporation’s volume cap (as designated by the Corporation) with no further competition process; however, each housing development will need to be approved by the Board on an individual basis before receiving a reservation from the Bond Review Board. Although volume cap is limited, the Corporation encourages proposals from developers of new and existing multifamily properties and will use its best efforts to provide bond financing to as many qualified properties as reasonably feasible for targeted areas of housing need identified by the Corporation.

PROGRAM OUTLINE

Targeted Areas of Housing Need–The Corporation has identified the following targeted areas of multifamily housing need in the state:

1) Rehabilitation of Multifamily Housing 2) Rural Housing (New Construction or Rehabilitation) 3) Senior Housing (New Construction or Rehabilitation) 4) Supportive Housing (New Construction or Rehabilitation)

The identification of these areas of housing need was achieved by: 1. Coordinating with the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs and

other state and federal agencies and reviewing relevant needs assessment; 2. Soliciting information regarding housing needs from local and regional housing

organizations; 3. Researching information on a statewide and national level to identify affordable

housing trends and solutions to meeting the needs of targeted areas in Texas; and


2

4. Meeting with affordable housing developers in the state and recognized professionals in the industry to determine target areas of housing need in their areas of expertise.

Request for Proposals – A request for proposals (“RFP”) will be issued to developers who agree to meet one or more of the targeted housing needs above. The evaluation of the proposals will focus on the developer’s capabilities and experience, but will also require a sampling of proposed housing developments that the developer expects to complete using the volume cap provided by the Corporation. The RFP process will not be a review of a specific housing development. Instead, the proposals for the potential developments will be evaluated according to the following criteria: 1) Meeting the target housing needs of the state as designated by the Corporation. 2) The qualifications and experience of the developer in constructing and/or rehabilitating affordable multifamily housing facilities. 3) The proposed construction standards and amenities. 4) The cost per unit for construction of the proposed housing development(s), while still providing the highest quality construction. 5) The proposed rents for residents of the proposed housing development(s). 6) The proposed low income set aside requirements. 7) The proposed resident services and detail as to how the services are appropriate and sufficient to meet the specific population’s need. Although the initial selection will not include an evaluation based on financial feasibility or evidence of local support, the developer must certify in its proposal that any development for which a volume cap reservation will be requested will have local support and be financially feasible. Evaluation, Selection, Public Hearing, and Allocation The staff of the Corporation will score and rank the developers and their proposed potential developments based on the above criteria, and the Board of the Corporation may select one or more developers. The Board may preliminarily allocate its available volume cap between developers for planning and development purposes, if more than one developer is chosen. The RFP will be extended month-to-month until all of the Corporation’s volume cap is preliminarily allocated. The Board may choose alternate developers who may receive a portion of the Corporation’s volume cap if one or more of the developers first chosen by the Board do not obtain a reservation of allocation by July.


3

Before the Board directs the Bond Review Board to reserve an allocation for a particular development, the developer must provide the Corporation with a detailed description of the proposed development (the “Reservation Detail”) that gives the specifics for the development, clearly setting forth that it meets the specifications in their original proposal. If the specifics vary from what was proposed, the variances must be explained in writing in the Reservation Detail. The Reservation Detail must also include evidence of local need and community support for the development, as well as evidence of financial feasibility. Evidence of local need and community support would include, but is not limited, to one or more of the following: 1) A letter of support for the development by the Mayor or the City Manager 2) A resolution of support from the City Council or County Commissioner’s Court 3) A letter from an affected neighborhood association 4) Evidence that a local government entity is provided funding for the development 5) A letter of support from the State Representative or Senator representing the district where the development is or will be located. A complete Reservation Detail must be submitted to Corporation staff at least 20 days before the Board meeting. Based on the final evaluation of the Reservation Detail, the Board may choose to pass an “Inducement Resolution” and direct the Bond Review Board to reserve an allocation for the development. If allocation remains after the July board meeting, the alternate developer(s) may submit their Reservation Detail for consideration at the August board meeting. After the reservation of volume cap, the Corporation will hold a public hearing (the “TEFRA Hearing”) on the development. Before the closing on the bonds, the staff will prepare final evaluations and recommendations to the Board, which will include any public comments received at the TEFRA Hearing. Based on those recommendations, the Board may choose to consider and adopt a Bond Resolution and to make a final decision on allocating the bonds for that development.

PROGRAM TIMELINES The anticipated timeline (as and if amended) for the proposal evaluation and selection process is shown below. The Corporation may amend this schedule by posting the revised schedule on its website (www.tsahc.org). October 2006 The Corporation publishes its 2007 Multifamily Housing

Private Activity Bond Program Guidelines (the “Guidelines”), including targeted areas of housing need, for comment.

November 2006 The Corporation adopts the Guidelines, including a

designation of the targeted areas of housing need for the 2007 program year, approves the criteria for scoring and ranking proposals, and approves the issuance of the RFP.

http://www.tsahc.org)


4

November 2006 The Corporation issues the RFP to developers. January 2007 Proposals are received by the Corporation. January/February 2007 Proposals are evaluated, scored, and ranked by the

Corporation’s Staff. High Scoring Respondents will be notified to appear at the Corporation’s next scheduled Board meeting. Respondents with the highest ranking proposals make oral presentations to the Corporation’s Board; developers and their proposed developments are preliminarily selected for allocation (alternate developer(s) may also be chosen).

March-July 2007 Reservation Detail due to the Corporation. Upon receipt of

full Reservation Detail the Board may adopt an inducement resolution pertaining to the development and direct the Bond Review Board to reserve an allocation for that development.

July/August 2007 Should the Corporation not have received Reservation

Detail by the July board meeting, or should it have allocation remaining for any reason, the Corporation may ask the alternate developer(s) to submit a Reservation Detail for consideration at the August board meeting.

August 15, 2007 Last date to procure volume cap from the Bond Review

Board; Bond Review Board recaptures any unreserved allocations.

Post Inducement TEFRA Hearings will be held; public comment will be

incorporated into final recommendations from the Corporation’s Staff to the Board; the Board proceeds towards bond closing and adoption of Bond Resolution; transaction must close within 150 days of receiving allocation reservation from the Bond Review Board.

Once the Corporation reserves an allocation of volume cap for the development, the developer must work with the Corporation to issue bonds within the relevant timeframes, statutes, and Bond Review Board rules and regulations. Developers are advised to review funding sources, commitments and financing structures to ensure they can meet anticipated timeframes for year 2007 submissions. In addition to meeting all requirements relating to private activity bonds set forth in the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, developments using federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits (“LIHTC”) in their financing plan must also meet all requirements of Section 42 of the Code, as amended, the United States Fair Housing Act, and all applicable State of Texas laws.


5

While the amount of volume cap available from the Corporation for multifamily developments is limited, the Corporation does encourage applications from multifamily developers and anticipates funding as many qualified projects as are reasonably feasible. Respondents are advised that the allocation of funds will be competitive and otherwise qualified developments may not receive funding due to the limited amount of available volume cap. Any and all costs incurred by the developer in responding to the RFP are the sole responsibility of the developer. Fees charged by the Corporation and its financing team for review of applications are nonrefundable and will be set forth in the Request for Proposal.