GAP Report for 9/21/26
POSITIVE
Clear Safeguards Can Strengthen Asheville’s HOME-ARP Plan
Asheville’s proposed HOME-ARP amendment could help more people move out of homelessness by expanding rental assistance and case management. We support the proposal and believe City Council should approve it. But the amendment will also determine who is first in line to draw from a limited assistance pool. We are asking the City to adopt two safeguards: (1) clear rules for balancing the needs of folks directly impacted by Helene with other urgent needs, and (2) regular public reporting that shows who receives assistance, who remains waiting, and whether the program is supporting those most in need. These details may sound technical, but implementation guidelines can determine whether a vulnerable family obtains housing or remains homeless or endangered.
REPORT BACKS
Deaverview Mountain Park could transform the neighborhood – but for whom?
The Buncombe County Board of Commissioners unanimously approved the Deaverview Mountain master-planning and engineering contract without discussing the displacement concerns we raised or adding any related safeguards. Commissioners spoke positively about the project and the County’s plans for community engagement, but no one asked whether the investment could increase housing pressures or whether current residents will remain able to benefit from it.
Active Issue Reports
Clear Safeguards Can Strengthen Asheville’s HOME-ARP Plan
POSITIVE
Summary: Asheville’s proposed HOME-ARP amendment could help more people move out of homelessness by expanding rental assistance and case management. We support the proposal and believe City Council should approve it. But the amendment will also determine who is first in line to draw from a limited assistance pool. We are asking the City to adopt two safeguards: (1) clear rules for balancing the needs of folks directly impacted by Helene with other urgent needs, and (2) regular public reporting that shows who receives assistance, who remains waiting, and whether the program is supporting those most in need. These details may sound technical, but implementation guidelines can determine whether a vulnerable family obtains housing or remains homeless or endangered.
The Facts: In 2021, the Asheville Regional Housing Consortium received approximately $4.7 million through the federal Home Investment Partnerships Program–American Rescue Plan (HOME-ARP) program. Asheville administers the funds for a four-county consortium covering Buncombe, Henderson, Madison, and Transylvania counties. The money must be fully invested by August 2030.
The current plan allocates approximately $3 million to affordable rental housing development, $1 million to supportive services, and $705,000 to administration and planning. Supportive services were originally focused on mental health and substance-use services. City staff recommend broadening them to include short- and medium-term rental assistance and comprehensive case management. Staff believe that a rapid-rehousing approach can help people obtain housing more quickly while addressing problems that threaten their long-term housing stability.
A proposed amendment would also give preference to individuals and families experiencing homelessness, particularly people whose first episode of homelessness occurred as a result of Hurricane Helene. Other eligible populations — including people fleeing domestic violence, trafficking, stalking, or sexual assault — would remain eligible, but they could be placed behind preferred households on a waitlist.
Finally, the City would begin using Coordinated Entry — the regional system for assessing people’s housing needs and referring them to homelessness services — along with other eligible referral sources to identify and prioritize applicants. The Asheville Regional Housing Consortium unanimously endorsed the amendment. City Council will hold a public hearing on the amendment on September 22. Written comments will be accepted through October 2, and final Council consideration is expected on October 13.
You can read the staff report here and see the presentation slides here.
Our Assessment: We support the amendment. Expanding rental assistance and case management is a practical response to the region’s housing crisis, and it makes sense to recognize the additional housing instability caused by Hurricane Helene. The amendment could help the City use HOME-ARP funds more effectively and move people into housing more quickly.
But good intentions do not automatically produce fair results. The rules used to carry out this program will decide who receives limited assistance first. Without clear safeguards, someone who became homeless after Helene could receive priority over a person trying to escape an abusive partner or trafficker. That may not be what the City intends, but the proposal does not clearly explain how applicants’ competing needs will be balanced.
The City should publish understandable prioritization rules that preserve an urgent pathway for people facing immediate safety risks. It should also avoid burdensome documentation requirements that prevent people from receiving assistance because they cannot easily prove when their homelessness began.
The City should also report regularly on how the program is performing. At least quarterly, it should disclose how many households were referred, enrolled, housed, or unable to be served; how long it took people to obtain housing; whether significant demographic or geographic disparities emerged; and how much funding remains.
Public reporting is not simply an administrative exercise. Without it, residents and Council cannot know whether people are being housed promptly, whether certain communities have meaningful access, or whether particular groups are consistently left waiting. The reporting would also help ensure that the funds are used before the August 2030 deadline.
These safeguards would not delay or weaken the amendment. They would help ensure that the program fulfills its purpose, reveal unintended consequences, and give the City an opportunity to correct problems before vulnerable residents are harmed.
Things to do: Email Asheville City Council to support the HOME-ARP amendment and ask for clear prioritization rules and regular public reporting before the plan is finalized.
Email Template: You can send an email to the Asheville City Council by filling out the form below. Our email tool will send an individually addressed email to the recipients, and enable us to track how many emails were sent overall in the campaign. If you prefer to write your own email, you can copy and paste (and adapt) our template text – please cc: or bcc: info@gapavl.org on your individualized email, so we can better track how many emails were sent.
Important: If you receive a response to your email, please forward it to us at info@gapavl.org so we can reflect that in the report back.
To: ashevillenccouncil@ashevillenc.gov
CC: or BCC: info@gapavl.org
Subject: Support HOME-ARP — and make sure no one is unintentionally left behind
Dear Mayor Manheimer and members of City Council,
I support the proposed amendment to Asheville’s HOME-ARP Allocation Plan and encourage Council to approve it when it returns for final action.
Expanding rental assistance and case management is a practical response to our housing crisis. It also makes sense to recognize the housing instability caused by Hurricane Helene.
I understand the program’s priority rules will determine which vulnerable households receive limited assistance first. Before final approval on October 13th, I encourage the City to adopt two safeguards to ensure HOME-ARP’s resources are fairly distributed.
First, please publish clear rules explaining how the Helene-related preference will be determined and balanced with other urgent safety and vulnerability concerns. Someone fleeing domestic violence, trafficking, or stalking should not face greater danger because another applicant falls within the preferred category. The process should also avoid documentation requirements that unfairly exclude people who cannot easily prove when their homelessness began.
Second, please ensure that the Asheville Regional Housing Consortium reports regularly on how many households are referred, served, housed, or unable to receive assistance; how long it takes people to obtain housing; whether there are significant demographic or geographic disparities in program access; and how much funding remains.
These details may sound technical, but they determine who receives help, who remains waiting, and whether the public can tell if the program is working fairly.
The safeguards recommended above would strengthen an amendment that deserves Council’s support. They would promote fairness and accountability without delaying assistance. Without them, this amendment could unintentionally be detrimental to vulnerable and marginalized residents.
Thank you for your consideration,
[Name]
[Address or neighborhood, if desired]
Deaverview Mountain Park could transform the neighborhood – but for whom?
QUESTIONABLE
REPORT BACK STATUS
Unsatisfactory Resolution
Report Back
The Buncombe County Board of Commissioners unanimously approved the Deaverview Mountain master-planning and engineering contract without discussing the displacement concerns we raised or adding any related safeguards. Commissioners spoke positively about the project and the County’s plans for community engagement, but no one asked whether the investment could increase housing pressures or whether current residents will remain able to benefit from it.
Last week, we asked the Commission to direct staff to assess and publicly report the project’s displacement risks. We asked whether the County had identified potentially affected neighborhoods, documented existing housing conditions and vulnerabilities, considered possible effects on rents, land values, and property taxes, or planned to monitor whether residents are eventually priced out.
When the contract came up in the meeting, staff discussed park access, trails, engineering, stormwater, environmental analysis, construction planning, and community engagement. Staff said outreach would include Deaverview residents, neighboring communities, stakeholder groups, and the broader public. Commissioners praised the project and asked about future construction costs, the timing of later funding decisions, possible early access to existing trails, volunteer participation, and the format of community-engagement events.
Neither staff nor commissioners referenced the questions we raised. Community engagement was discussed extensively, but there was no discussion of baseline housing information, displacement-risk analysis, housing-cost monitoring, or possible protections for nearby residents. The Commission approved the contract without modifying the planning process or asking staff to report back on these issues.
While we’re glad the County is planning on doing community engagement, we don’t think this is a sufficient safeguard for the issues we’ve raised. The County has the capacity to analyze relevant data, much of which it already has, in order to project likely displacement risk for residents living near the park. If such risks exist, it’s possible – even likely – that those residents will be unaware that they are in any danger of being displaced.
This was a missed opportunity to ask the right questions while the project is still being planned and the County still has time to act. It remains unknown whether Deaverview Mountain Park will cause displacement, because the County chose to move forward without determining whether the risk exists or creating a process to recognize it before residents are harmed.
Total GAP Supporter Actions Taken: 9
Recipients and Responses:
Buncombe County Commission
- County Commission Chair Amanda Edwards: No response
- County Commissioner Al Whitesides: No response
- County Commissioner Drew Ball: No response
- County Commissioner Jennifer Horton: No response
- County Commissioner Martin Moore: No response
- County Commissioner Parker Sloane: No response
- County Commissioner Terri Wells: No response
Summary: Buncombe County will consider a $1.34 million contract to plan and engineer a major new park on 342 acres at Deaverview Mountain. Living near a beautiful public park could be a tremendous benefit for residents of the surrounding community, but only if they are able to remain and enjoy it. The proposed planning process does not appear to ask whether this investment could also increase housing pressures or unintentionally push residents out. The County should assess the displacement risk for this project, determine whether closer analysis is warranted, and then take action to ensure that existing residents are protected.
The Facts: Buncombe County has acquired 342 acres on Deaverview Mountain for what it expects to become its largest public park. The property is currently closed to the public. The County envisions a park focused on conservation, hiking, passive recreation, and environmental education. It has reserved $7.7 million in Open Space Bond funding for the project.
Commissioners are considering a contract with Equinox Environmental for two phases of work: $487,469.50 for master planning and $852,045.90 for engineering and design of access, parking, and trails. Together, the two phases total $1,339,515.40. The planning process will assess the property, solicit community input, and help determine the park’s layout, amenities, costs, and phased development.
Deaverview Mountain is located within an existing residential area that includes public housing, private rental housing, and owner-occupied homes. Although the proposed process includes community engagement and extensive analysis of the park property, the agenda materials do not identify a separate assessment of surrounding housing conditions or the project’s potential effects on housing stability.
You can read the request for Board action here and see the presentation slides here.
Our Assessment: Deaverview offers a concrete example of why GAPavl has been pushing all year for the County to adopt an anti-displacement analysis framework. The point of such a policy wouldn’t be to prevent positive public investments like a park on Deaverview Mountain. The point would be to ensure that the people already living nearby share in its benefits rather than being unintentionally pushed out as the neighborhood becomes more desirable. An anti-displacement framework would not label every public investment a threat or require mitigation in every case. It would ensure that the County asks a consistent set of questions early enough for the answers to matter.
First: who lives near the project, and who may be vulnerable? The County should establish baseline information about renters and homeowners, household incomes and housing-cost burdens, subsidized and naturally affordable housing, older or fixed-income homeowners, evictions, foreclosures, rents, sales prices, and assessed values. Together, this information (which the County already possesses or has access to) would provide an economic and housing profile of the neighborhood, showing whether residents may be vulnerable to displacement and why. If vulnerability appears low, the County could proceed with the project while keeping this information as a benchmark for tracking future changes. However, if vulnerability is determined to be substantial, protecting and strengthening housing stability should become an explicit objective of the master plan, supported by measures that help existing residents remain in the community.
Second: is this project likely to create meaningful housing-market pressure? The County should examine recent rent and sales trends, land purchases, development activity, and the likely effects of entrances, parking, trails, and major amenities. If vulnerable residents live nearby but the project is unlikely to change housing costs or development pressure, immediate mitigation may not be necessary. The County should still compare neighborhood conditions with its baseline at key stages of the park’s development and reconsider action if rents, property values, evictions, property turnover, or redevelopment activity begin to indicate growing displacement pressure. However, if vulnerability and likely market pressure are both assessed to be substantial, the County should act before land costs rise and options narrow.
Third: who is at risk, and what can the County do to help them remain? Different residents face different pressures, so the appropriate response will depend on what the County finds.
- If lower-income homeowners face rising property taxes or other costs of remaining in their homes, the County could expand outreach and enrollment for property-tax relief, help families resolve unclear legal ownership of inherited homes, provide home-repair support, and strengthen foreclosure-prevention assistance.
- If private renters or lower-cost rental properties are at risk, the County could support nonprofit or community-land-trust acquisition, preserve existing affordable rentals, provide tenant legal assistance, and help create more permanently affordable housing nearby.
Finally: will the people who already live nearby be able to enjoy the park’s benefits? The master plan should ask whether neighborhood residents, including residents of Deaverview Apartments, will have safe and convenient access without a car, whether entrances and amenities reflect their priorities, and whether they will have a continuing role in shaping the project. If the proposed design does not provide meaningful benefits to the immediately surrounding community, the County should modify it. If residents would benefit but some also face displacement risk, the County should pair those improvements with housing-stability measures that help them remain and enjoy the park.
The purpose of asking these questions is not to stop the development of Deaverview Mountain Park. A major new park could improve residents’ quality of life and become a lasting neighborhood and community asset. The federal grant that financed much of the acquisition was available in part because Deaverview is designated as a disadvantaged community. The purpose of asking these questions is to help ensure that the neighborhood residents whose needs helped justify this public investment can remain to enjoy those benefits. If an anti-displacement assessment finds little risk, the project can proceed with confidence. If it finds meaningful risk, the County will still have time to respond.
Research from other communities shows why these questions should be asked early. Along Atlanta’s BeltLine – a more urban and development-oriented project than Deaverview – homes within half a mile appreciated 17.9 to 26.6 percentage points more than comparable homes farther away between 2011 and 2015. Broader research examining 621 new parks and greenways found that these effects are not inevitable; they vary according to the project’s location, function, and surrounding neighborhood. These studies do not predict what will happen at Deaverview. They demonstrate why the County should examine local vulnerability and likely market effects while it still has time to respond.
Things to do: No action suggested at this time. Last week, we invited you to email the Buncombe County Commission and ask it to revise the Deaverview Mountain master-planning process to include a displacement-risk analysis and, if such risks are identified, appropriate housing stability measures to protect existing residents.
Safety, Second Chances, and HACA’s New Screening Rules
QUESTIONABLE
REPORT BACK STATUS
Outcome Unknown
Report Back
HACA Screening Policy Outcome Is Still Unknown
Updated 8/31/26: The Housing Authority of the City of Asheville (HACA) Board met on August 26 after receiving public comments on proposed longer lookback periods for several criminal convictions. Because HACA has not published minutes, a recording, or another account of the meeting, we do not know whether the revised screening policy was discussed, amended, adopted or postponed.
Total GAP Supporter Actions Taken: 6
Recipients and Responses:
Housing Authority of the City of Asheville
- Board: No response
Asheville City Council
- Mayor Esther Manheimer (appoints all Board members): No response
- Vice Mayor Antanette Mosley (Council liaison): No response
Summary: The Housing Authority of the City of Asheville (HACA) is accepting comments through 11:59 p.m. tonight (August 24, 2026) on proposed criminal-background screening procedures. The proposal offers applicants stronger procedural protections but would also extend the lookback period for many convictions from five years to seven years, 10 years, or life. We have heard that part of the motivation is concern from residents who survived rape, molestation, or stalking that their assailants could be approved to move into their housing communities. Those safety concerns deserve substantial weight. But the longer periods would also apply to property and drug crimes – including felony drug possession – and HACA has not publicly explained the basis for each change.
The Facts: The proposal would:
- Apply lifetime lookbacks to intentional homicide, kidnapping or human trafficking, and forcible sex or rape convictions
- Apply 10-year lookbacks to felony stalking and many other felonies, including assault, robbery, burglary, drug possession, and drug distribution
- Apply seven year lookbacks to misdemeanor domestic-violence convictions
- Allow consideration of violent patterns outside the stated periods
- Exclude arrests without charges and generally require additional evidence before considering dismissed charges
- Provide an individualized review meeting, consideration of rehabilitation, and up to 30 days to gather supporting evidence
You can read the full proposed policy revision here. The 48-day public-comment period began July 8 and ends at 11:59 p.m. tonight. Comments may be sent to comments@haca.org.
Our Assessment: HACA is right to consider the safety of residents who fear that people convicted of serious violence against them could return to their housing communities. The proposal responds directly to some of those concerns by establishing longer (or lifetime) lookbacks for rape, stalking, homicide, and other violent offenses. (A lookback period is the length of time a past conviction remains relevant when HACA reviews someone’s housing application.)
But the proposal also extends scrutiny to offenses that do not necessarily involve violence or a threat to another resident. For example, felony drug possession and two or more felony theft or fraud convictions would carry 10-year lookbacks. Drug-related crime convictions in particular have a well-documented racial bias. HACA has not explained how these longer exclusions address the resident-safety concern motivating the proposal, how many applicants they would affect, or whether a shorter period or more individualized approach would be sufficient.
The proposal may ultimately strike an appropriate balance between safety, rehabilitation, and access to housing. Before adopting it, HACA should explain why longer lookbacks are necessary for nonviolent convictions and how it will avoid excluding people who no longer present a risk to residents.
Things to do: No action suggested at this time. Last week, we invited you to email HACA before 11:59 p.m. Monday night – and copy Mayor Esther Manheimer (who appoints all HACA Board members) and Vice Mayor Antanette Mosley (who is the City Council liaison to HACA) – asking HACA to explain why the proposal extends lookback periods for nonviolent convictions and how those extensions advance resident safety
PREVIOUS REPORTS
GAP Report for 9/14/26
Deaverview Mountain Park could transform the neighborhood – but for whom? Buncombe County will consider a $1.34 million contract to plan and engineer a major new park on 342 acres at Deaverview Mountain. Living near a beautiful public park could be a tremendous...
GAP Report for 9/7/26
Asheville Should Adopt “No Rent for Slumlords” At the request of the Asheville Area Tenants Union, Asheville City Council will consider a “No Rent for Slumlords” ordinance on September 8. The proposal would empower tenants living in unsafe homes by prohibiting...
GAP Report for 8/31/26
Helping Flood Survivors Reestablish Safe Housing Without Losing Community Buncombe County will consider accepting $4.12 million in federal hazard-mitigation funding to acquire and demolish flood-prone homes. The voluntary program can protect residents from repeated...
GAP Report for 8/24/26
Why Rush Zoning Changes Before Asheville’s Anti-Displacement Tool Is Ready? Asheville City Council will vote Tuesday on allowing duplexes in more neighborhoods and permitting accessory dwelling units to be larger and easier to build. These relatively modest reforms...
GAP Report for 8/17/26
County Staff Calls for an Impact Analysis – So Why Approve the Rezoning Before It’s Done? Buncombe County Commissioners will vote August 18 on a request to change two Kampgrounds of America (KOA)-owned parcels near US 70 from commercial to residential zoning. County...