Frederick County Council Agrees To Withdraw MPDU Bill

The sponsors hope to bring it back in the future.Frederick County Councilman Steve McKayFrederick, Md (KM) The Frederick County Council could consider a bill sometime in the future limiting the ability by residential developers  to pay a fee instead of building affordable housing as part of their projects. The board on Tuesday went along with one of the bill’s sponsors, Councilman Steve McKay, to withdraw the legislation. .He said he and co-sponsor Councilman Mason Carter, met with the County Executive who asked that  the bill put on hold until a housing study set to get underway is completed. “I was aware of the housing study, but I wasn’t aware of all of the elements of the study,” McKay said. “A study that tells us and quantifies our housing shortfall was not going to be  a reason for me to reconsider the timing of the MPDU bill.”MPDU stands for Moderately Priced Dwelling Units.”However, what was new information for me was the fact that from this study they’re specifically tasking their consultant to come up policy recommendations that could very well be germane to the bill,”: says McKay.The Moderately Price Dwelling Units ordinance was adopted in 2002, and requires residential developers to set aside at least 12.5% of the houses in their projects for persons  making 70 to 90 percent of the area’s median income. In 2011, the County Commissioners revised the ordinance to allow developers to pay a fee into the Housing Initiative Fund which would support affordable housing projects. It could be used to provide rental assistance for low income residents. It would also provide down payment assistance for first time home buyers and deferred loans  for organizations which promote affordable housing in Frederick County.The legislation sponsored by Councilmen McKay and Carter would require developers who want to pay a fee rather that build affordable housing to get approval from the County Executive.”The bill that comes forward in the future will still include at least that core provision about excluding the fee option for age-restricted. We may reconsider aspects of the approval criteria and then we’ll see what else comes forward. But it will come back,” says McKay.By Kevin McManus