202/811 study: is small beautiful?

Interesting HUD-commissioned report out from Abt Associates on "implications of project size" for disability and senior housing under Secs. 202 and 811.

The writers spent considerable time looking at how or whether these special-purpose buildings provided supportive services. They found that regardless of project size, Sec. 202 (disability) buildings were less likely than 811 (seniors) buildings to help residents arrange their supportive services, and one-third of the Sec. 202 project sponsors in the study "reported they play little or no role in coordinating services for residents because their residents arrange their own services." In general building managers were not enthusiastic about providing services beyond "those that residents need to live as independently as possible in their homes" -- they preferred that residents be helped by other organizations. "Sponsors typically view housing as housing, not as a therapeutic setting."

Otherwise the study found 65% of interviewed residents liked their buildings, but that complaints, when made, mainly had to do with other tenants, and most residents didn't get to know neighbors outside the building. It recommended that HUD encourage smaller 202/811 projects in the future, these being generally more popular with both residents and neighbors. A further comment called for designing maximum privacy into the units -- which is good advice given the crab-barrel dynamics that can develop among troubled tenants living close together.

It's interesting to see that many building managers would really rather not be service providers. There certainly do seem to be built-in difficulties whenever a single organization tries to provide both property management and more personal forms of assistance such as counseling or health care. ....in fact, do any readers here have comments about the fit between property management and service provision in supportive housing projects?

HUD 'regulatory barriers' awards

Here's the press release on awards today from HUD to 14 municipal governments for "reducing regulatory barriers to affordable housing." Looks like some of these folks even practice downright regulatory encouragement of affordable housing. There are detailed descriptions. Go read.

Surprise, surprise...

The Census Bureau reports median home values are still rising.

...Meanwhile the Legal Services of N. Cal. blog notes an interesting New York Times map showing the geographical distribution of interest-only loans.

...and if the plain old ordinary real estate market isn't interesting enough at present, theREALTYgram has spotted plans for a real estate derivatives market.

Budget updates

HAC has a summary posted of last week's appropriations action, focusing on rural housing effects of both the HUD and the USDA budget. The THOMAS appropriations boxscore page is catching up but still not giving full details.

A cheerful view of housing tax credits

From Donna Kimura in our latest issue:

(Affordable Housing Finance, July 2005) — There’s been talk for months that the price of low-income housing tax credits (LIHTCs) will drop, but several leading developers haven’t seen that happen, yet.

“The market is good,” said J. David Heller, principal of The NRP Group. “It’s a good time to be a developer.” Read more...

Budget... housing fund.... Reality TV?

In Friday's NLIHC Memo to Members: budget updates, negotiation over the H.R. 1461 housing fund proposal -- and concern over a reality TV show called "Welcome to the Neighborhood." It seems the show features minority and nontraditional families competing to be "allowed" to live in a house by their future neighbors (talk about NIMBYism) -- and all of the neighbor-judges appear to be white Christian conservatives. The National Fair Housing Alliance considers that awfully close to encouraging the violation of federal fair housing laws.

Comments?

A notice on PHAs' capital grants

HUD's PIHN 05-22, out today at HUDCLIPS, offers guidance for capital fund grants to public housing authorities out of $2.43 billion available from fiscal 2005 appropriations.

HUD is also about to celebrate the tenth anniversary of its Neighborhood Networks centers. (Any reader comments on that program?)

July AHF articles available online

See our site's Affordable Housing Finance front page for Washington and budget news, The Buzz, and more items to come.

Kelo case has the Web buzzing

Well, Google News and Technorati show lots of property-rights conservatives blaming "liberalism" for yesterday's Kelo eminent domain ruling. The thoughtful conservative Volokh blog has been posting item after item on the decision, which you can find scrolling up and down from this one.

Many of the liberal weblogs haven't reacted to Kelo yet, but liberal blogger Atrios is ambivalently in favor, and the liberal US/UK academics at Crooked Timber suggest, tongue in cheek, that certain works of Marx and Engels could have found a place in the opinion. The City Comforts New Urbanist blog finds several criticisms, including from a liberal planning perspective, and rakes the New York Times -- and Atrios -- for supporting the decision.

David Smith of the Affordable Housing Institute links back to his own extensive past blogging on the issue, in which he said, "Both sides are fighting the wrong fight on the wrong terrain." The left/libertarian/geek community of Slashdot had a huge debate yesterday about the meaning of "liberalism" in light of Kelo. There's a similar debate going at the Brooklyn-based real estate blog Brownstoner.

Then there was a favorable press release from the American Planning Association. The New York Times editorialized for the decision but ran a sympathetic feature on the wrenching specifics of the New London case in addition to the legal issues writeup.

Comments from readers?

[UPDATE: a pro-Kelo view (sort of) from Matthew Yglesias at The American Prospect; more support there from Jeffrey Dubner.]
[Further update: Liberal group weblog Daily Kos has an opening post in favor and much mostly literate wide-ranging discussion thereafter.]
[And more: a sense of "Alice in Wonderland" at TPMCafe.]

LIHTC/Sec. 8 notice reinstated

PIH Notice 2005-20, published today at HUDCLIPS, "reinstates and extends" PIH 2002-22, governing rent amounts for Section 8 subsidies in buildings that use low-income housing tax credits.

An invitation to defend the LIHTC

From our publisher, Andre Shashaty:

The debate on tax code changes will get rolling July 31 when the Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform appointed by President George W. Bush issues its report.

Meanwhile, in Congress the chairmen of the tax-writing committees were moving quickly to set the overall direction of the tax debate. At press time, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) was preparing to hold the first of a series of hearings on tax reform. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) is expected to follow Thomas’ lead and begin consideration of tax law changes before the Bush administration submits a plan.

For the low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) industry, the big concern is that major tax law changes could reduce the credit’s appeal to investors, or even eliminate the program.

Washington insiders don’t think Bush has much chance of pushing through a major tax code overhaul, such as implementing a flat tax, but the housing industry is working to educate Congress to make sure the credit remains safe.

On the downside, a renewed effort to eliminate taxes on corporate dividends is viewed as very likely. Bush was forced to back off from a similar proposal two years ago, but a new effort could deter tax credit investors.

On the upside, there’s broad political support for repealing or indexing the alternative minimum tax, which would actually help make tax credits more valuable to some investors.

Given the early start on reform plans in the House, and the already pending Bush proposal to extend current tax breaks, it’s possible a tax bill could be considered in September, but major changes would be unlikely until 2006.

For more information, go to http://taxreformpanel.gov.

•••

If you want to help defend the LIHTC, send your comments to the reform panel. For advice on what to say, contact Francine Friedman of Hunton & Williams, where she is legislative counsel to the Affordable Housing Tax Credit Coalition.

Also write to your congressional representatives and tell them about the value of the tax credit projects you help produce in their district or state.

“Your readers cannot possibly overestimate how important it is for them to contact people in Washington,” said David Gasson, executive director of the Housing Advisory Group, which advises and educates members of Congress and the administration on housing policy, and specifically on low-income housing tax credits.

For more information, call Gasson at (617) 624-8900.

AHF Online: GSEs and rural housing

Newly available online at Affordable Housing Finance: Barry Jacobs does a more detailed examination of affordable housing features in the GSEs regulatory reform bill, HR 1461, and if you scroll down you'll find his notes of House Appropriations action on the rural housing programs. (The page also includes a message from our publisher, Andre Shashaty, that will be online here as a separate item in a few moments.)

Supremes continue their takings law kick

The Supremes have made it a busy month for specialists in the law of property takings. First Lingle, then San Remo Hotel, and now Kelo v. City of New London. Today's decision (NYT writeup here) upheld an official condemnation of private homes and businesses that would convey condemned land to other private owners for a waterfront economic development scheme. The objecting homeowners included one woman who has lived in the same house since her birth in 1918.

No more tax-exempt bonds for Fannie

Online from Affordable Housing Finance today: "Mortgage finance giant Fannie Mae has pulled back from the tax-exempt bond market for an indefinite amount of time, according to reliable sources...." Read more

If not public housing, then what?

The Urban Institute looks at serving those of the "hard to house" who can be left out when HOPE VI redoes traditional public housing. Full report available free in PDF.

HUD's disability report up for comment

HUD has posted an 80-page draft report evaluating its own compliance with disability rights law under Sec. 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, addressing both HUD's enforcement of the law and compliance in its own offices. Comments are due July 22 and it's OK to use Regulations.gov or the EPA-based EDOCKET.

Bulletin: new LIHTC revenue procedure

Just out this afternoon for owners and administrators working with federal low income housing tax credits: IRS Revenue Procedure 2005-37, providing a safe harbor for compliance with IRC Section 42(h)(6)(B)(i) restrictions during the extended use periods of tax credit projects as described in Revenue Ruling 2004-82.

San Fran hotel conversion law upheld

From the Supreme Court yesterday, San Remo Hotel v. San Francisco, upholding a municipal ordinance that imposed high fees for converting residential hotel rooms to tourist use. The SF Chron has the story.

[UPDATE 6/22: Findlaw has an interesting conservative view of the decision from Columbia professor Michael Dorf.]

Newsy newsletter alert

An especially juicy NLIHC Memo to Members is out currently, with detailed analysis on last week's TT/HUD appropriations markup and an editorial responding to Wall Street Journal criticisms of the HR 1461 affordable housing proposal (q.v. below). Also, the Census Bureau's approach to counting prisoners; comments on HUD's rent-setting formulas; college students in public housing, and a detailed data page comparing HUD's "Fair Market Rent" estimates from 2004 with those in the current proposal for 2006.

Finding rules in HUD's exceptions?

A little help requested here, if you don't mind.

Once a quarter --today, for example -- HUD publishes a list of the exceptions it has granted to its own rules, including for subsidized multifamily housing. Of course, some items on these lists reflect exceptions that are themselves provided for in the rules -- but sometimes they appear to show when the agency will accept developers' and owners' arguments that the existing rules don't fully cover real life. And that seems worth watching.

Today's list shows that in the first quarter of 2005, 22 projects were temporarily exempted from Mark-to-Market rent reductions, and 30 were allowed to extend fund reservations of capital advances past 18 months. Some housing authorities were let off from usual inspection standards due to hurricane damage. A mixed-finance project using low-income housing tax credits in Oregon was allowed to close without HUD review of documents that had recieved other regulatory review. Assorted exceptions were granted on the sore subject of Section 8 voucher rents, including, in a handful of cases, waivers allowing otherwise too-high subsidies to continue in order to help disabled tenants keep housing deemed medically necessary for them. And there's much, much more.

So about my opening request for help: judging from the technical nature of the referring pages that lead people to this weblog, some of our readers certainly know from the inside about the real-life stresses affecting housing development and management. (And, no, I don't just mean hurricane damage.) So I'm asking you to please help explain the significance of these waivers to the rest of us. Click the "Comment" button just below this entry, type a comment, and comment anonymously if you like. We're waiting to hear from you....

Loan arranging on the HOME funds

Of possible interest to developers using federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC): here's a Technical Advice Memorandum (TAM) from the IRS on the proper tax treatment of HOME and Affordable Housing Program (AHP) funds received by the general partner in a LIHTC project and loaned by that general partner to the entity owning and operating the project.

The TAM considers whether the generous terms of these loans, and the source of the money -- a HOME grant and an AHP forgivable loan -- mean that the "loans" might really count as "grants," thereby possibly reducing the eligible basis of the project. The TAM concludes that for LIHTC purposes the transactions are not grants. However, it does find that the loans are "below market loans." It says the loan of HOME funds is a "below market Federal loan under Sec. 42(i)(2)(D)," while the loan of AHP funds is a "below market loan under Sec. 1.42-3(a), and not... a below market Federal loan under Sec. 42(i)(2)(D)." It is a conclusion that appears to affect the project's eligibility for the full 70 percent present-value tax credit.

TAMs and Private Letter Rulings may not be cited as precedent but can suggest how the IRS is likely to rule. New installments appear each Friday under "Written Determinations" on the IRS Electronic Reading Room page. Updated indices such as this one are included in the Reading Room's directory. Both indices and determinations are numbered according to the year and week of their public release. For example the item just discussed, TAM No. 200523023, was released in the 23rd week of 2005, or two Fridays ago.

A rehab cheap at $300 per square foot?

Welcome to the Dartmouth Hotel of Dudley Square, Boston, subject of a three-part AHI Blog case study and also of an AHF feature mentioned therein. AHI's David Smith makes the case that rehabilitation costs of $240,000 per apartment were worth it to convert a "trophy building" from eyesore into showpiece and with it help to turn a neighborhood around.

Meet me in St. Louis: I've seen the AHS data

From the announcement on today's joint HUD/Census release of 13 American Housing Survey metro data sets:

Median monthly housing costs in 2004 totaled $694 for homeowners and $593 for renters in the St. Louis metropolitan area. These costs amounted to 17 percent of the owners’ and 27 percent of the renters’ income.

Sounds nice. Sounds incredibly swooningly nice from this desk, which also happens to have on it a social service agency's referral list of San Francisco downtown flophouse rooms, many with bathroom down the hall, costing $125 to $200 per week. These are being recommended to very poor people as just about the cheapest unsubsidized rentals in San Francisco. By contrast with which the Post-Dispatch real estate classifieds make quite heavenly reading.

But about the AHS data -- It's available for the metro areas of Atlanta, Cleveland, Denver, Hartford, Indianapolis, Memphis, New Orleans, Oklahoma City, Pittsburgh, Sacramento, St. Louis, San Antonio, and Seattle. Lots of material available in big files at HUDUSER, other details in a big Census Dept. PDF (warning, the file is a honking 13.1 MB). Not the most accessibly presented data in the world but lots and lots of it.

HR 1461: the story so far

Here's a selection of links (feel free to suggest others) on HR 1461, the bill that would consolidate and overhaul regulation of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banks and would also create a low-income housing fund:
- Bill status and original text from THOMAS.
- The Affordable Housing Institute blog's early take on the proposal.
- Secretary Jackson of HUD offering faint praise for it as not quite tough enough.
- Mixed reviews from the American Enterprise Institute's Shadow Financial Regulatory Committee on the issue of limiting the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac portfolios.
- The National Housing Trust Fund Campaign on the affordable housing proposal.
- NLIHC extremely happy at the housing fund's approval by the full House Financial Services Committee on May 25.
- The Affordable Housing Institute blog noting multifarious criticisms of the May 25 version, some of these from affordable housing advocates, and thence launching into detailed discussion of what's at stake. Further discussion here and here and here.
- Wisconsin Democrats on an anti-redlining amendment.
- The Financial Services Committee's own summary of the bill as amended.
- A more detailed summary from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh
- The National Association of Home Builders' qualified praise.
- Stronger praise from the Mortgage Bankers' Association.
- Fannie Mae's own statement.

House TT/HUD markup results

The TT/HUD subcommittee has already posted a summary of this morning's appropriations markup, which includes its version of the HUD budget. (Thx to NH&RA for spotting it.)

The summary of the subcommittee markup results shows HUD's overall budget at $37.5 billion, $1.547 billion more than last year's funding. Section 8 voucher housing gets $15.53 billion, an increase of $765 million but still $314 million less than the White House budget proposed. Project-based Section 8 gets $5.10 billion, being $210 million less than last year. More details on the subcommittee's own site, and further details presumably findable later when they get around to updating the THOMAS appropriations progress chart.

Housing subsidies mean better-fed children

Today's HAC News has the usual useful potpourri of appropriations updates etc.

And then there's an eyebrow-raiser. It's word of an interesting report by the C-SNAP pediatric and public health network. Unfortunately the full report costs money to read, but the press release and abstract say C-SNAP has evidence for one of these things poverty advocates often wish they could prove: that small children in low-income families receiving housing subsidies are less likely to suffer from undernutrition than in low-income families with no such subsidies.

In other words, cutting housing subsidies makes children measurably hungrier.

HUD environmental review up for comment

In further paperwork generated by the Paperwork Reduction Act of blessed memory...

Today's Federal Register offers affordable housing developers a chance to comment on HUD's environmental review process for proposed housing developments. Comments are due via snail mail by July 15.

[UPDATE: Whaddayaknow, here's a report from the folks at GAO saying the Paperwork Reduction Act isn't reducing paperwork. Well, at least, not as presently enforced, not at most agencies, and among other things specifically not at HUD. The report says it was requested to help guide planned Congressional action on the subject, so stay tuned.]

Weakening the SACI proposal

A bulletin from the CDFI Coalition (not yet online) brings further word that the Strengthening America's Communities Initiative is weakening. It says the House Appropriations subcommittee with the amazing new handle of "Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, and the District of Columbia" ("TT/HUD" for short) has just endorsed $55 million for the CDFI Fund, which under the Bush Administration budget proposal would have gotten no grant money at all, just an administrative budget a hair under $8 million to run the New Markets Tax Credit. Today's action still doesn't match the $80 million that 54 Senators have endorsed, but it's close to what the Fund got last year.

SACI is the Bush Administration proposal to melt down all the community development grant programs into one pot and distribute the money under a new formula -- a move that some viewed from the start as simply a gambit to make community development advocates work harder for their usual appropriations. For some time, Congress has been plugging along reauthorizing the existing grant programs, while the SACI advisory and drafting process continues alongside. Per the CDFI Coalition's understanding, the SACI advisory committee still intends to hand in its recommendations and the Bush Administration will be sending proposed legislation to Congress "before the end of the month." But if it's going to pass at all, it probably won't be any time soon.

Steam-Bubbled, Not Stirred

Urban Trekker wonders what Mr. Greenspan means by "froth". Any readers here got a theory?

[UPDATE: David Smith of the Affordable Housing Institute has a few ideas, starring inter alia Yoda, Pieter Brueghel the Elder, and the Amazing Mystico]

Proposed FMRs: well, some are up.

NLIHC has done some more number-crunching on the proposed 2006 Fair Market Rents for voucher housing. They find actually quite a few increases, while counties with lowered FMRs "generally fit into one of two categories: counties dropping out of or switching metropolitan areas, and counties with declines due to recent Random Digit Dialing (RDD) surveys." Not that that's much consolation if you're one of them.

REGIONAL: 90 days for CA Sec. 8 evictions

Yesterday the Cal Supremes ruled unanimously that Section 8 tenants in California are entitled to 90 days' notice when a landlord chooses not to renew their tenancy contract. The case, Wasatch Property Management v. Degrate, S112386, upholds the applicability of Cal. Civil Code Sec. 1954.535 to all parts of the state, not just those with rent control ordinances. (For the statute, scroll down to the last item here.) The SF Chron's Bob Egelko has a detailed writeup.

In federal notices today

- Notice HSGN 05-13 appears on HUDCLIPS today introducing "a financing option that may be offered" for nonprofits, governmental entities, and "approved Asset Control Area (ACA) program participants" to buy, rehab, and resell HUD-owned single-family properties. It's a "Purchase Money Mortgage," described as an extremely short-term mortgage, lasting 180 days or five years depending on type, in some cases interest-free. The notice gives extensive details including a model mortgage draft.

- Of possible interest regarding property insurance: a final rule is out today from Treasury defining who counts as an insurance company's "affiliate" for purposes of terrorism insurance risk being shared by the government through the end of this year. Reading the "hypothetical scenarios" at bedtime is not advisable: they're hair-raising.

Today in the Federal Register

...there was not much to write home about in the housing business, except that folks looking for federal surplus land might want to note several meeting date announcements for the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission.

Oh, and Friday's HUDCLIPS included a new handbook for HUD staff on receiving Title VIII housing discrimination complaints.

'State of the Nation's Housing': pricey

The Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies released its State of the Nation's Housing report today, with sponsorship from the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

Not much surprise in the basic summary: homeownership is up, but so are home prices, and so are risky choices like interest-only loans, and so are worries. The report says prospects are better for investment than for affordability. Overall, wages are not keeping up with the increased cost of housing, but the pinch is distributed unevenly: 33 of the 110 top U.S. metro areas have home prices more than four times their median incomes, while the report finds relative affordability in other places.

[Update: Via The Housing Bubble 2, here are Boston and San Diego perspectives on the study.]

[Further Update: More from the Washington Post via Mark Thoma.]

Taking stock of the NMTC awards

Via the NH&RA newsletter, here's an analysis from the CDFI Coalition of the first three rounds of New Markets Tax Credit awards.

Today in the Federal Register

A doozy of a Federal Register item today for recipients of HUD community development grants, specifically Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs), HOME funds, HOPWA, and the Emergency Shelter Grants flavor of McKinney-Vento funding.

It's a notice setting out a draft "performance outcome" grading system for recipients of all these grants -- part of HUD's long-running effort to judge the quality of grant-funded projects using measurable data.

At the start of the grant, each recipient would choose from a list which "objective" and "outcomes" to be graded on. These, and the purpose of the grant, would determine the "output indicators" for HUD to use in judging if the money was well spent.

The new draft standards -- phrased in general form, not as a proposed regulation -- are described as the result of a 2004 agreement among HUD and OMB officials and community development trade groups, including the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials and the National Council of State Housing Agencies.

I'll link to the Federal Register PDF here because the proposal draft doesn't show in the HTML version. The announcement includes dates, beginning June 30, for "five facilitation sessions and one satellite broadcast to explain the importance of measuring performance and the use of the proposed outcome performance measurement system to capture those results." Here's their link for more information on same.

Comments on the proposal have a generous 90-day deadline -- it's September 8, 2005 -- and this time the comments don't have to be snail-mailed: electronic submission is permitted through either Regulatons.gov or HUD's section of EDOCKET at EPA.

Chairman Greenspan's testimony today

Here's Reuters on his congressional testimony, which included comments on the housing market. The Fed site has his prepared remarks.

Any comments from our readers? (C'mon, don't be shy...)

Lingle, Emily Litella, and property rights

Thought it might interest folks to do a roundup on last month's Supreme Court decision in Lingle v. Chevron, which affects "takings" challenges to land use restrictions such as zoning and rent control. Lingle threw out the earlier Agins v. City of Tiburon doctrine that a regulation of private property is an unconstitutional "taking" if it "does not substantially advance legitimate state interests." Mark Tushnet, blogger and Constitutional scholar, called the decision a "Never mind" in the spirit of the great fictional misunderstander Emily Litella.

The decision's immediate effect was to disappoint a property owner by refusing to overturn a Hawaii rent control law specific to leased gas stations. However, the National Association of Home Builders welcomed the decision as a victory for property rights, saying it clarified the applicability of other doctrines in the law of takings. The American Planning Association and a Washington Post editorial praised it for reducing confusion and heading off a possibility of excessive court meddling with regulatory legislation.

By way of in-depth analysis, here's a discussion of takings law at the National Law Journal that discussed Lingle last November while the case was still pending. And there's a big archive of briefs by the Lingle parties and amici at the Georgetown Environmental Law and Policy Institute.

Not helpful?

Oh. Sorry. Never mind.

REGIONAL: Early news of CA tax credit awards

The Sacramento Business Journal reports a big award of low-income housing tax credits today to the Globe Mills project, which is to redevelop historic mill buildings into 114 units of senior housing, also using federal HOME and brownfields assistance.

In other words, the California first-round tax credit awards are out. They're not yet listed on the site of the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, but then the committee only just met this afternoon. Might also want to check the California Housing Finance Agency site for announcements on today's decisions.

New LIHTC form instructions

Anyone planning to file Form 8693, the Low-Income Housing Credit Disposition Bond (for taxpayers disposing of low-income housing tax credit buildings or interests in same) may want to check today's IRS Announcement 05-43 for new instructions. The item just got here on a news media feed, so it should appear in the next day or two at this link. If it doesn't, try the June 27 Internal Revenue Bulletin, which at the end of the month should be available here or via the Advance Notice page.

Housing in the Federal Register today

- HUD issues a final rule lifting the current minimum face value requirement on Ginnie Mae securities
- HUD asks for comments by August 8 on Ginnie Mae Mortgage-Backed Securities Guide 5500.3, Revision 1, including the forms it contains.
- HUD issues a proposed rule that would impose new performance standards on Round II Urban Empowerment Zone grant funds. Comments are again due August 8. Cash grants are being phased out of the Empowerment Zone program -- the Bush Administration prefers to give the zones tax breaks and bond authority -- but the Round II urban designees are still receiving appropriations from Congress based on Clinton-era authorizations.

Curbed Enthusiasm

A warm welcome to readers of the New York City real estate blog Curbed who are visiting us today. Our New York-based associate editor Bendix Anderson suggests folks in or near Manhattan may want to be aware of the Supportive Housing Network of New York conference, starting tomorrow at the CUNY Graduate Center. Bendix notes that New York City is a center for good supportive housing ideas.

Harnessing the boom in D.C.

Another sample from our June AHF issue: Bendix Anderson writes about real estate transfer tax money pouring into the Washington, D.C. Housing Production Trust Fund.

Fiddly technicalities, con't

HUD-assisted multifamily developers with gripes about the required land survey report have until July 7 to express them to OMB.

For future reference, this and other subjects of Federal Register "information collection" publications can be found at the HUD ICB Tracking site.

The sum of the PARTs

OMB Watch has an analysis here on the politics of OMB's "PART" evaluation method as reflected in public Congressional conversations about saving the Community Development Block Grants. Pretty deeply inside-the-Beltway stuff, but possibly useful background for following the debates on federal community development grants generally.

Fair FMRs?

For what it's worth, interesting that HUD is advertising for a contractor to study the fairness and usefulness of its Fair Market Rent estimation process.

Broder on H.R. 1461

NLIHC recommends the David Broder column in Thursday's Washington Post about the H.R. 1461 affordable housing fund possibility.

'Main Streets Go Home'?

Interesting conversation this weekend between big liberal webloggers Atrios and Kevin Drum about outer-surburban opposition to mixed-use development. It sounds like the fear -- in parts of Orange County anyhow -- is that if public spaces attractive to foot traffic are created, then unpopular foot-based activities such as loitering will result. Kevin Drum's post brought out some thoughtful responses.

Brownfields and greenbacks at Black Creek

Nice Wall Street Journal overview here about growing interest in brownfields redevelopment. Lots of vignettes from where the rubber (PCB, petroleum, whatever...) meets the road, including the opening of a "Black Creek Village" development on the property once less realistically known as "Love Canal."

From our June print editions

Our print publication Apartment Finance Today reports on a survey that asked 415 apartment executives about their use of computer technology. Most of them did like the property management software they had, but they wanted faster, more versatile software that would mesh better with other systems.

In online previews from the June Affordable Housing Finance, Donna Kimura digs into this year's New Markets Tax Credit awards, and John Z. reports on a possible increase in the use of tax-exempt bond financing.

Questions from the editors III

Another question for our readers from Editor John:

"Everybody complains about NIMBYism, but few people know what to do about it. Share with us your solutions. How have you dealt with local opposition to an apartment development? What made it work? What would you like to see in the way of help from your state housing finance agency or city planning departments?"

Free GIS tools online

The May 31 entry on the weblog for Legal Services of Northern California (LSNC) is recommending several free online databases that organize information by location -- also known as "Geographic Information Systems" (GIS). The writers' favorite is the Dataplace service from Knowledgeplex.

As the LSNC people note, GIS approaches to information are becoming popular with official planners. HUD has been doing extensive work of this type since the mid-'90s for purposes that include housing project policing and community planning -- as becomes clear from a search on the word "GIS" at HUDUSER. The HUDUSER offerings include an 18-megabyte Power Point presentation that explains with nifty graphics how overlays of GIS data allow planners to compare data on diverse topics such as transportation access, flood plain risks, redlining, incentive areas such as Empowerment Zones, access to public utilities, and concentrations of poverty. As usual with Power Point presentation slides, it's a pity these don't come with audio, but even the slides by themselves are eye-openers regarding current use of this futuristic tool.

Out already: the 2006 proposed FMRs

Well, someone at HUD must have listened to all that ruckus last fall, because the proposed Fair Market Rents (FMRs) for 2006 are in this morning's Federal Register, two months earlier than last year.

Housing advocates protested mightily last summer because HUD waited until August to release its proposed FMRs, which limit the rent levels that local housing authorities may subsidize through the Section 8 "Housing Choice" voucher program. The advocates howled even louder when the announcement appeared, because it was full of surprises based on new data, the comment period was only a month, and some of the random dialing surveys (used to check extrapolations from census figures) were not finished in time for the announcement. (HUD later took back some of its figures but between low FMRs and cuts in federal payments to voucher programs, some housing authorities still did have to cut subsidies; meanwhile, of course, there's a legislative proposal in the works that would let housing authorities base their subsidy levels on other rent data instead of FMRs.)

Hard to tell if HUD got an earlier start on the surveys this time around, but anyway they're giving the public two months for comment -- comments are due August 1 -- and the June announcement means they're giving themselves a further two months to work out glitches, since the legal deadline to announce final FMRs is October 1.

For a quick look at the announcement, try the HTML version, which loads without most of the tables. For the full 67-page PDF, click here. Might also be worth watching the HUDUSER FMRs data set page for the next few days.

From the announcement, it looks like public comments need to be sent in duplicate by snail mail, with one copy to the Rules Docket Clerk in Washington (it gives the address), and a second copy to "the Economic and Market Analysis Staff in the appropriate HUD field office" (it doesn't give the field office addresses). Of course most commenters will likely be housing officials who know full well where to find their local field offices, but for those who don't, here's the online directory of HUD offices.

So -- any comments on the local effects of the proposals, or anything else?

Spinning housing subsidies in Oregon

Interesting approach at Oregon Housing and Community Services to writing a report that could have been simply a dull recital of units constructed and tenants housed. It's called "Housing As An Economic Stimulus" and it sets forth three recent subsidized projects as illustrations of the notion that government housing subsidies can generate many times their cash value in local prosperity. In a politically clever step, it anticipates the suggestion that the benefits go only to disadvantaged tenants and places pointed emphasis on the additional profits to local contractors.

202/811 SuperNOFA corrections

Yes, more SuperNOFA corrections, this time to the Sec. 202 and Sec. 811 programs for senior and disabled tenants. Mainly technical changes, but the announcement in today's Federal Register pushes back the Sec. 202 deadline to July 1. It otherwise would have fallen yesterday. (See the main SuperNOFA announcement in the March 21 FR.)