Today, HUD released its fourth notice on implementation of the Housing Opportunities Through Modernization Act of 2016 (HOTMA), bipartisan legislation passed unanimously and enacted in July 2016 to streamline PHA operations and regulations.
The new notice seeks comment on several HOTMA provisions, including income calculations, occupancy standards, and asset limits. Sections 102, 103, and 104 of HOTMA contain many statutory changes to the United States Housing Act of 1937.
The statutory changes proposed in the notice would apply to public housing, Section 8, HOME, HOPWA, and HTF programs. The main issues for which HUD is seeking comment that apply to public housing and Section 8 programs are summarized below.
Income Reviews and Calculations (Section 102)
- In revising the definition of family income, HUD asks for input on the challenges of instituting HOTMA provisions on income definitions for public housing, the HCV program, and PBVs, but not for PBRA.
- HOTMA states that if a family’s adjusted income increases by 10% or more, the PHA must conduct a reexamination of the family’s income within a “reasonable amount of time” after the PHA is made aware of the change. HUD is seeking comment on what constitutes a “reasonable amount of time.”
- For interim income reexaminations, HUD is also seeking comment on whether it should require that PHAs use the Enterprise Income Verification (EIV) system for interim reexaminations, or only for initial and annual reviews.
- HUD is seeking comment on the administrative impacts of the safe harbor provision that allows PHAs to use income determinations from other types of public assistance. The Department is also seeking feedback on developing rules for using other income determinations when a household has income determinations from multiple types of public assistance, and whether it should expand the list of public assistance programs that can be used for income determinations.
- In the HOTMA provision stating that a PHA will not be out of compliance for income review and calculation due to any “de minimis error” made by the PHA, HUD is seeking comment on its proposed definition of a “de minimis error” as one where the PHA’s calculation of a family’s income varies from the correct income by 5% or less.
- While a HOTMA provision would eliminate the disallowance of earned income (EID) for rent determinations, HUD is seeking comment on allowing households currently receiving the EID benefit to continue to do so until their allowed time expires.
- HOTMA includes a simplified definition of annual income, and HUD is seeking comment on redefining it to include the imputed return on assets over $50,000 of actual income for assets that cannot be calculated.
- HUD is seeking comment on whether certain other income sources, such as payments from a nonrevocable trust fund and insurance payments, should be considered income in the simplified definition of annual income.
- HOTMA creates new income exclusions and grants HUD the authority to name additional exclusions. HUD is seeking comment on whether other income sources should be excluded, such as income for all veteran’s disability benefits.
- HUD is seeking comment on the hardship exemption for health and medical expenses, and how a PHA should determine that a family is unable to pay their rent due to changes in these expenses. HUD also asks for comment as to whether PHAs should be allowed to establish their own policies for making this determination.
- Under HOTMA, PHAs may allow additional deductions so long as the deductions do not “materially” increase federal expenditures. HUD proposes that PHAs adopting additional deductions would not be eligible to receive any additional program funding to cover the increased costs attributable to the additional deductions, and HUD is seeking comment on this definition of “material.” HUD is also seeking comment on whether additional deductions, such as work-related income, could be used as an employment incentive.
Income Limitations (Section 103)
- While HUD is not specifically requesting comment on HOTMA’s provisions for terminating over-income families, the notice states that because HOTMA requires PHAs to submit annual reports on over-income families in public housing, HUD is developing a tool and process that will allow PHAs to submit these data.
Income Assets (Section 104)
- Under HOTMA, families receiving housing assistance may not have net assets exceeding $100,000, including real property suitable for occupancy that the family owns or partially owns. HUD proposes if a family owns or partially owns property suitable for occupancy, the family would need to demonstrate that it does not have the right to occupy or sell the property, which would exclude the property from the asset test. HUD is seeking comment on the test to exempt the property, and how families would demonstrate that one of the conditions apply.
- HOTMA also excludes domestic violence victims from the real property restriction, and HUD is seeking comment on how this provision should be administered.
- HUD proposes some clarifying changes regarding items excluded through HOTMA for the asset test. Specifically, they ask whether the asset test should exclude personal property items valued at $50,000 or less, such as a car or medical equipment.
Comments are due on November 18. CLPHA will be submitting comments and scheduling a member call to solicit feedback on the notice. For questions about the notice, please contact Senior Research & Policy Analyst Emily Warren at [email protected].
From the Los Angeles Daily News:
As students across the Los Angeles Unified School District headed back to classrooms Tuesday, district officials heralded a new partnership with city and county housing agencies aimed at providing support to a number of housing insecure and homeless families in the northeast San Fernando Valley.
Douglas Guthrie, president and CEO of the Housing Authority for the city of LA, said the agency will grant 50 Section 8 housing assistance vouchers to LAUSD households as part of a pilot program in coordination with LA Family Housing and Mayor Eric Garcetti’s office, in hopes of duplicating the venture in other parts of the district.
Read the Los Angeles Daily News' article "LAUSD partners with city housing agencies to assist northeast Valley families," featuring the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles.
On July 26, HUD issued a notice announcing a new initiative to provide Tenant Protection Vouchers (TPVs) to youth aging out of foster care. HUD describes the program, known as the Foster Youth to Independence (FYI) initiative, as one designed to address the unmet housing needs of youth aging of foster care, who often experience high rates of homelessness after exiting the child welfare system.
While HUD’s Family Unification Program (FUP) is intended to serve both families and youth involved with the child welfare system, 95 percent of current FUP participants are families, according to the notice. Because so few PHAs administer FUP vouchers-- only 280 nationally--eligible youth experience dual barriers to receiving a voucher in that families are more likely to be referred and many youths may live in a community where FUP vouchers are not an available resource.
To address the challenges of serving foster youth through FUP and preventing future homeless episodes, the FYI initiative will provide TPVs for FUP-eligible youth to PHAs who are not currently administering FUP vouchers. PHAs interested in receiving a TPV for an eligible youth will be required to create a partnership infrastructure with their local child welfare agency that is similar to what is required of FUP grantees. Eligibility criteria for the initiative follows FUP eligibility guidelines for youth. For more detailed instructions regarding the application process and eligibility requirements, please see the full notice.
The National Center for Housing and Child Welfare is hosting a series of webinars on the FYI initiative, and some of the content may be of interest to CLPHA members who are considering applying for FYI vouchers. Registration for the webinars can be found here.
CLPHA would like to hear from members who are considering applying for FYI vouchers. To indicate your interest or to raise questions or concerns about this new initiative, please contact CLPHA’s Senior Research & Policy Analyst Emily Warren at [email protected].