August 2009
HUD: Listening and Learning To Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) held a mid-July kick-off meeting to hear the concerns of the housing advocacy and civil rights communities, among others, as it develops proposed regulations this fall to bolster the affirmatively further fair housing program, known as AFFH. As housing providers, most of LeadingAge’s (formerly AAHSA) subsidized housing provider members are required to have Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plans (AFHMP) for their developments and to update them at least once every five years. The MOR reviewers will be sure to ask to see them and match them against your approved Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plans. According to a clarification incorporated in the June 23, 2009 Change 3 to the HUD Occupancy Handbook 4350.3, an AFHMP is required for all properties built prior to January 1972, or substantially rehabilitated since that day, or as required by the Housing Assistance Payments Contract
“Only through carefully planned, well-informed, collaborative strategies will we be able to create strong, inclusive, and viable communities for all,” Pam Walsh, director of HUD’s Fair Housing (Office of Policy, Legislative Initiatives, and Outreach), said during the webcast, inviting questions via email and phone. Also making speeches and listening to comments were John Trasviña, assistant secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), Bryan Green, general deputy for FHEO, and Mercedes Marquez, assistant secretary for Community Planning and Development.
The need for regulations, which Walsh said were designed to help HUD funding recipients better meet AFFH requirements, were prompted by a ruling in a federal housing de-segregation lawsuit brought against Westchester County, N.Y., which settled Aug. 10 for $62.5 million. The lawsuit, brought on behalf of the United States by the Anti-Discrimination Center (ADC), alleged that the county received more than $50 million in federal housing and development funds during a six-year period by falsely certifying AFFH.
The court earlier this year granted a motion for a partial summary judgment and found, among other things, that the county failed to affirmatively further fair housing, which is required of federal grant recipients.
“The recent court activity in Westchester County, New York, serves as a wake-up call for the need to have this dialogue,” said Walsh.
The listening session (find it here) focused on six topics:
1. How can the existing process be improved?
2. What documentation do recipients use to demonstrate compliance with AFFH requirements and to support their certifications?
3. What factors should be included in an analysis of impediments (AI) for fair housing choice?
4. How often should the AIs be updated without creating undue burden?
5. What are the advantages and disadvantages of creating a regional approach to AFFH?
6. What can communities and public housing agencies do to reduce housing segregation and increase housing opportunities for protected classes under federal housing civil rights laws?
One suggestion, by Vicky Watson of the National Community Development Association, was for HUD to allow additional Community Development Block Grant and HOME funds — beyond those for administration — to advance fair housing, even “allow[ing] grantees to use their entire program funding to undertake fair housing activities.” She added — in a comment echoed by others — that annual technical assistance should be provided to local governments on the analysis of impediments process regarding AFFH.
Adam Gordon, of the Fair Share Housing Center in New Jersey, said the regulations need to make clear how state and federal programs work together. He recommended, as did others, that HUD focus on fair housing outcomes as opposed to simply adding more processes.
Craig Gurian, ADC executive director and co-counsel in the case against Westchester, said at the meeting with HUD that recipient agencies must meet their share of regional affordable housing but that, in doing so, not be allowed to protect the whitest blocks from affordable housing construction. New rules should ensure that “jurisdictions will be held to account” if they fail to demonstrate compliance, he said. Thorough AIs should help jurisdictions make changes that would be a “prerequisite to continued funding eligibility.”
Another unidentified person calling in noted that given the long-established racial and ethnic makeup in some communities, promoting fair housing is difficult because people ultimately can choose where they live and might tend to self segregate in areas where, for instance, a common language is spoken. Another person said some residents fail to see the need for fair housing policies because they don’t believe they live in areas that are segregated.
The president of the Daytona Village Tenants Association in Orlando requested that HUD fund community organizers to help residents “enforce their rights” and “to enforce the rules.” She also called on HUD to visit where her primarily elderly residents live — places that she said are not safe and are not decent.
Other suggestions included:
· Increasing the overall capacity of affordable housing and helping fund the recruitment of architects and others who can design quality housing;
· Taking a regional approach to fair housing to improve effectiveness;
· Working in partnership with local Realtors, including taking their diversity classes and using their statistics to track housing or to self-test for fair housing; and
· Incorporating AFFH requirements into all federal housing programs, including those that provide federal financing to private groups building multifamily homes.
HUD said these views and suggestions will be taken into account as it crafts regulations and guidance for grantees.
An Association of Not-For-Profit and Mission Focused Senior Living & Care Providers
1495 Wilmington Drive, Suite 340 | DuPont, WA 98327 | 253-964-8870 | 253-964-8876 Fax | www.LeadingAgeWA.org