Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Forbath continued that if a resident needed to go into assisted living, the property <br />could be sold to pay off the loan, and the property would now include the home and the <br />lot. She added that if the person passed away in five years, the piece of land would be <br />an asset that would go to the heirs, who would have the choice to keep it or sell it. <br />Commissioner Fox inquired what percentage of residents would be able to qualify for a <br />$200,000 loan. <br />Ms. Forbath replied that as long as the residents are low income, they would qualify for <br />the State program; additionally, the park owner would assist those who do not qualify in <br />obtaining a regular home loan by working with lenders and looking for available <br />financing that is much better than what is in place today. <br />Commissioner O'Connor inquired whether or not deferring principal and interest would <br />make the loan actually higher than the value of the lot and home combined. <br />Ms. Forbath replied that this does not typically occur as land values go up and there <br />would be equity. She noted that the home or "coach" would depreciate, but the price of <br />real estate increases. <br />Commissioner O'Connor inquired if the State would extend a loan for both the mobile <br />home and the land if an 85-year-old resident is making payments on the mobile home <br />and purchases the land for $200,000. <br />Ms. Forbath replied that the loan would only be on the land but that the existing mobile <br />home loan would be considered in the assessment. <br />Commissioner Fox noted that the survey was done for ten years into the future and <br />inquired if this would be adequate or bona fide, considering that the price ten years from <br />now would be unknown and seniors would have no idea what the values would be in the <br />future. <br />Ms. Forbath replied that there are several reasons for someone to support the <br />conversion without knowing whether or not they want to buy, including the recognition <br />that it provides options in the future. She noted that one would not necessarily have <br />enough information until the DRE process is completed, and the applicants cannot go to <br />that process until they are approved by the City. She added that the survey is not <br />asking whether or not they want to buy but whether they support the idea of having an <br />option in the future. <br />Mr. Close stated that he raised similar points when the law was being proposed, but the <br />legislature decided that the survey must be done in the beginning of the process. He <br />indicated that he thinks the legislature wanted the park owner to get a feeling as to <br />whether or not residents might be interested in K>urchasing if they were able to do it and <br />if financing was available. He indicated that he agreed with some comments that the <br />EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 25, 2009 Page 8 of 19 <br />