- Attorney/Advocate Resource Center
- What's New
- Assisted Housing Preservation
- Public Housing
- Section 3 Program
- Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers
- Domestic Violence and Housing
- Foreclosure Crisis
- Language Access to Housing (LEP)
- Reasonable Accommodation for Persons w/ Disabilities
- Utility and Energy Issues
- Low Income Housing Tax Credit
- Re-entry
- Resident Engagement
- Choice Neighborhoods Initiative
- Publications, Trainings, and Webinars
- Housing Justice Network
- Help for Tenants, Homeowners, and Homeless
- Support NHLP
- About NHLP
- Contact NHLP
March 2009 Housing Law Bulletin Summaries
Obama Signs Stimulus Bill Providing Major Support for Affordable Housing
On February 17, President Obama signed into law the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), the long-anticipated stimulus package intended to provide relief to those hardest hit by the recession and to steer the country back on a path toward economic recovery. As reported in the February 2009 issue of the Bulletin, the final conference report emerged from a House and Senate conference convened to resolve significant differences between their respective bills. The bill signed into law by the President reflected the compromise reached by the two houses and contained a number of significant appropriations related to affordable housing, many of them representing important victories for advocates. This article examines the affordable housing-related provisions of ARRA.
HUD Appropriations for FY 2009
After much delay, the Senate passed the Fiscal Year 2009 Appropriations Act on March 10, 2009, and President Obama then signed the bill into law. The bill appropriates funds for the fiscal year that began on October 1, 2008. The budget increases funding on the whole, but some programs continue to be underfunded. Overall, the budget for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) increased from $37.6 billion to $41.5 billion. This this article provides an overview of how the HUD funding is distributed across key programs.
Delayed HUD Rule Would Alter Social Security Number Requirements
On January 27, 2009, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published in the Federal Register a final rule that purports to further HUD’s Rental Housing Integrity Improvement Project (RHIIP) initiative, which is designed to reduce errors in HUD’s rental assistance programs. The January 27 final rule would have four major effects. First, it would require every member of every household in HUD assisted housing to submit and verify Social Security Numbers (SSNs). Second, it would require housing providers to use HUD’s Enterprise Income Verification (EIV) system to verify incomes of participants. Third, it would make changes in the provision and continuation of assistance to persons of particular immigrant statuses independent of the impact of the SSN requirements on these individuals and families. Finally, it would change annual income calculation for public housing, voucher, and HOME assisted programs. HUD’s stated purpose for creating the revised regulations is to identify and prevent various types of fraud and abuse in rental determinations. This article considers the various impacts of the implementation of this rule.
Settlement Upholds Tenant’s Right to Operate Child Care Facility in Her Apartment
Child care and housing advocates recently won an important victory on behalf of a tenant who sought to open a licensed family child care home in a multifamily complex. In Morrison v. Vineyard Creek, L.P., tenant Sarah Morrison was threatened with eviction and retaliation after she informed her property management company of her plans to open a licensed family child care home. Morrison settled her case and is now allowed to operate her business without fear of retaliation, eviction, discrimination, or harassment. This result affirms the rights of thousands of California child care providers who live in multiunit dwellings and the families they serve. This article provides an overview of the case.
Court: Owner of Massive NYC Complex Wrongfully Raised Rents for Thousands of Tenants
A New York appellate division court unanimously held that the owners of Manhattan’s largest apartment complex improperly raised rents and deregulated thousands of units after receiving millions of dollars in tax breaks. In Roberts v. Tishman Speyer Properties, L.P., the appellate division held that apartments at the sprawling Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village complex must remain rent-regulated for as long as the building’s owners receive tax abatements under the city’s J-51 program. The court’s decision was at odds with guidance promulgated by the New York Division of Housing and Community Renewal, which stated as early as 1996 that certain owners receiving J-51 tax breaks could deregulate rent-controlled units. If the decision stands, it could protect thousands of rent-controlled units citywide from deregulation. This article provides an overview of the case.
San Francisco and Oakland Issue Declarations Protecting Tenants from Utility Shutoffs
The cities of Oakland and San Francisco, California have recently issued declarations, precipitated by the increase in foreclosures, which will help renters keep their water, gas and electrical service functioning should their landlords stop paying the bills. These declarations will allow tenants whose landlords are responsible for utility payments to locate and inform the building owner of his or her obligation to continue making payments. This article provides an overview of the issue and declarations.
