Asheville Housing Panel Narrows Repair Aid, Sends Bond Policy to Council

Asheville's Affordable Housing Advisory Committee spent most of its May 14, 2026, special meeting on one question: who should come first when 2024 housing bond money starts paying for home repairs. After a failed ranking motion, a withdrawn substitute and a hybrid compromise, the committee voted 10-0 to send an amended home repair policy to City Council. The final version now requires that repair homes include seniors, children or persons with disabilities, which narrows eligibility compared with the staff draft.

---

• Eligibility narrowed 9-1: Households must be at or below 80% of area median income and include seniors, children or persons with disabilities.
• Ranking the priorities failed 1-9, with members split over neighborhood targeting.
• Unanimous 12-0 amendments set 5-year prorated forgiveness, a $1 million home value cap and residency waivers for storm damage.
• Policy heads to council, with a vote targeted for June 23.

---

The Fight Over Who Comes First

Why it matters: This debate decides which homeowners get first access to up to $40,000 in bond-funded repairs. It also exposed a split over whether neighborhood targeting protects legacy communities or leaves out needy residents elsewhere in Asheville.

Where things stand: The staff draft listed four unranked priorities: households at or below 60% of area median income (AMI); long-term homeowners and households at risk of involuntary displacement; areas vulnerable to displacement or disinvestment; and homes with seniors, families with children or persons with disabilities. Under the draft, repair agencies would explain in their applications how they address each priority.

Vice Chair Brian Methvin argued that readers would assume the list was ranked. He proposed an explicit order that put income first, household demographics second, tenure third and neighborhood last. His reasoning was that many low-income owners became low-income after they bought their homes. "'Cause nobody with 60% AMI purchased a home in the last 5 years in Asheville, right?" he said.

Committee Member Tara Irby backed clear direction to keep administrators consistent, warning of "I think, the possibility of some exclusionary practices."

The other side: Committee Member Nnweyna Smith defended keeping neighborhood priorities. "So if we take it out, those same residents get missed again," she said. She added that "Asheville has not cared about the marginalized communities."

Committee Member Paul S. Heathman II raised the opposite risk. "If you're poor in the wrong neighborhood, you're going to get overlooked," he said. Affordable Housing Officer Sasha Vrtunski said the neighborhood factor should not be disqualifying.

Committee Member Jane Christen noted that Greensboro, Durham, Wilmington and Raleigh do not rank eligibility. She cautioned against letting perfect become the enemy of good. Committee Member Michael Pesant said ranking without a plan for how the order is used "takes us into murkier territory."

Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The ranking motion failed 1-9. Only Committee Member Scott Adams voted yes. Methvin, who made the motion, was recorded voting no. The votes of Irby and Smith were not clearly recorded.

Heathman then moved to turn the priorities into requirements. He withdrew the motion after Vrtunski raised the case of storm-damaged homeowners above 60% AMI.

Irby proposed a hybrid: "those 2 as requirements, and the other 2 as priorities." It passed 9-1, with Pesant opposed and David Bartholomew absent after leaving the meeting. Methvin later explained his shift: "I think that's a tighter policy."

Under the adopted version, 80% AMI and a household with seniors, children or persons with disabilities are requirements. The 60% AMI threshold, long-term and displacement-risk households, and vulnerable neighborhoods remain priorities. The practical effect is that working-age homeowners without children or disabilities are shut out.

Committee Chair Andy Barnett had resisted that outcome. "I don't love making them requirements. I like giving discretion," he said.

---

What the Repair Program Offers

The basics: City Council asked the committee to write a home repair policy that could be carried out with 2024 housing bond funds. Vrtunski drafted it with an eye toward simplicity and flexibility. She drew on policies from six or seven other North Carolina cities and on advice from bond counsel. She said, "I feel like we're in really good shape to spend bond monies on home repair."

Where things stand: The program would work through nonprofit or for-profit administrators with no financial interest in the homes.

• Aid amounts: Grants of up to $25,000, and total aid of up to $40,000 through forgivable loans.
• Covered work: Manufactured housing, emergency repairs, accessibility, energy efficiency, and septic and well systems.
• Excluded work: Cosmetic work, new units and homes that are not owner-occupied.
• Rules: A 5-year residency requirement, plus fair housing and minority business participation clauses.

The income ceiling is not negotiable. "We cannot go over 80% with our money," Vrtunski said. The draft and presentation are available: Draft Home Repair Policy and Presentation.

Why it matters: Barnett framed home repair as central to stabilizing core neighborhoods and completing Hurricane Helene housing recovery. "There are really two critical things facing our community right now on the housing front, and that is stabilizing housing within some of our core city neighborhoods," he said.

Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The committee voted 10-0 to recommend that council adopt the amended policy. Bartholomew and Committee Member Alvarez Lopez Abernathy were absent. Low-income homeowners in qualifying households, repair agencies and legacy neighborhoods stand to benefit once council acts.

What's next: The policy goes first to the Policy, Finance and Infrastructure Committee, which is the full council. A council vote is targeted for June 23. Stakeholder focus groups will take place in between, and Vrtunski expects only small tweaks.

---

Longer Forgiveness, Fewer Barriers

Why it matters: These terms decide what happens if a homeowner sells after repairs. They also determine whether heirs and uninsured storm victims can qualify.

Where things stand: Christen pushed to lengthen the forgiveness period. "The 3-year loan forgiveness period is a little bit short when comparing it to the other North Carolina jurisdictions," she said. She also proposed several underwriting controls: no ownership of other residential property, clear title, a property value limit and a home insurance requirement.

Adams proposed a waiver of the residency rule for disasters. His language would let city staff grant exemptions for "flood damage, fire damage, wind damage, catastrophic mechanical or structural failures."

Committee Member Stuart Zitin questioned the 5-year residency rule. Staff said it targets long-time homeowners and mirrors Charlotte's policy. Irby asked what happens if forgiveness conditions are not met. Vrtunski pointed to Buncombe County's model, which forgives $5,000 per year.

The other side: Irby warned that a clear-title rule could hinder owners of heirs' property, meaning homes passed down without formal title transfer.

Community and Economic Development Director Nikki Reid flagged insurance as a trap for the very people the program targets. She said it is "one of the things that the state's Renew NC program is dealing with, with storm repairs, because people don't have insurance." Both the clear-title and insurance provisions were dropped.

Committee Member Mike Holmes raised rapidly rising property values in vulnerable areas. Members agreed $1 million was high enough. Barnett noted that Habitat's own $300,000 cap had proved too low.

Decisions and stakeholder impacts: The committee voted 12-0 to ask staff to add four changes:

• a catastrophic-damage residency waiver;
• 5-year prorated forgiveness;
• a bar on owning other residential property;
• a $1 million value cap.

Together, these changes protect bond dollars while keeping doors open for storm victims and heirs.

---

Repairs Move Ahead of the Anti-Displacement Tool

Where things stand: Vrtunski described a citywide Anti-Displacement and Affordable Housing Project, which was presented at a March council work session. It pairs housing production with anti-displacement protections. It also ties together the Missing Middle Study, the Affordable Housing Plan and the Legacy Neighborhoods Coalition's six priority action areas.

Staff will hold focused conversations on the repair policy before it reaches council. Participants will include:

• the Legacy Neighborhoods Coalition;
• GAP AVL;
• Asheville for All;
• MountainTrue.

A participant who volunteers with Asheville for All described a working group led by Ben Woody and Dawa Hitch, with a workshop set for May 20. The group is modeling a data tool on San Antonio's approach. The participant said the tool is "basically trying to build a composite that could act as an early warning system of sorts on the front end."

The other side: Methvin doubted the broader timeline. "I have a feeling that anti-displacement timeframe won't be met and will, you know, be 12 years from now before we repair anybody's house," he said. Vrtunski cautioned that the tool is not designed to evaluate individual homeowners.

Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Reid said the committee's role is to shape the policy "and help it move forward in tandem" with the larger project. Heathman urged speed. "But this money is here and we need to get it working," he said.

What's next: Barnett proposed having administrators track first-year outcomes against the priorities so the committee can revise the policy later.

---

Minor Items

• Minutes approved: The committee approved its March 5, 2026, minutes 11-0 by roll call.
• Plain-language rewrite: Staff agreed to simplify terms such as "eligible applicants," "involuntary displacement" and "disinvestment" before community review.
• Residency wording fixed: Staff will replace "occupy" with "maintain as principal residence," so owners need not live in the home during repairs.
• Future agenda: Barnett asked for a future item on the anti-displacement project and the committee's role in it.

---

Looking Ahead

The amended home repair policy goes next to the Policy, Finance and Infrastructure Committee. A City Council vote is targeted for June 23, after stakeholder focus groups weigh in.