CLPHA Press Room

Yesterday, CLPHA and counsel Reno & Cavanaugh submitted public comments in opposition to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) proposed rulemaking titled “Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds” (83 FR 51114) (the “Notice”). The Notice proposes to expand the basis upon which a non-citizen seeking adjustments to their residency or visa status are likely to become a “public charge.”

The proposed public charge definition would include, among other things, public housing, Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, and Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance. In other words, receiving federal housing assistance could negatively impact a non-citizen program participant’s visa status.

The practical result of the Proposed Rule is to penalize families for participating in the very housing programs that are meant to serve them. Because this directly contradicts the mission of PHAs, our comments call on DHS to abandon the Proposed Rule in its entirety.

Our detailed comments focus on the following concerns: 

• The inclusion of housing assistance in the determination of a public charge, when eligible
• status is an existing pre-requisite for program participation, creates confusion among residents and otherwise
• undermines the mission of those programs.
• The Proposed Rule is increasing the administrative burden on PHAs across the country,
• despite proposing no direct changes to the housing programs administered by PHAs.
• Access to decent, safe, affordable housing is necessary for building healthy communities
• and increasing family self-sufficiency.

On October 10, 2018, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a notice of proposed rulemaking titled “Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds” (83 FR 51114) (the “Notice”). The Notice proposes to expand the basis upon which a non-citizen seeking adjustments to their residency or visa status are likely to become a “public charge.”

Currently, a “public charge” is defined as an individual who is “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence,” as demonstrated by the individual’s receipt of certain public cash assistance or long-term institutionalized care at the government’s expense. The Notice proposes to expand the list of benefits considered in the public charge analysis to include, among other things, public housing, Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, and Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance. In other words, receiving federal housing assistance could negatively impact a non-citizen program participant’s visa status.

After a November 19 conference call with CLPHA members who shared feedback on the proposed rule, CLPHA and counsel Reno & Cavanaugh drafted public comments in opposition for the following reasons:

• DHS appears, by definition, to attack and punish the successful administration of Section 8 and Public Housing programs to the individuals for which they are intended. In other words, the litmus test is no longer whether an individual is “primarily dependent” on government assistance. Rather, it is whether an individual participates in these housing programs at all.
• The Proposed Rule seems to demand that eligible families decide between accessing essential housing assistance or maintaining their ability to enter or remain in the United States. Either choice will have detrimental results—the family foregoes access to decent, safe, affordable housing or is deemed a public charge.
• The practical result of the Proposed Rule is to penalize families for participating in the very housing programs that are meant to serve them. This directly contradicts the mission of PHAs, and as such, we respectfully submit that the Proposed Rule be abandoned in its entirety.
• The Proposed Rule, even at this stage, holds a detrimental impact on the communities we serve.
• PHAs across the country are experiencing increased demands on their already limited and underfunded resources because of the ambiguity and confusion caused by the Proposed Rule.

Final comments are due Monday, December 10, 2018. If you have any questions about our comments or the proposed public charge rule, please contact CLPHA Research & Policy Analyst Emily Warren, ewarren@clpha.org, or 202-638-1300 ext. 103.

On November 29, CLPHA attended a meeting at HUD headquarters with other industry groups to discuss changes to the inspection process. Recent news coverage has highlighted instances in which inspection scores do not accurately reflect living conditions and overall declines in the number of inspections for properties.

At the meeting, an official from HUD’s office of public affairs noted that the department has received an increased number of media and FOIA requests related to inspections in the last few years. HUD officials also acknowledged that the current inspection standards are 20 years old and an update and review of those standards is needed in order to maintain safe environments for residents and to ensure that scores accurately reflect housing conditions.

In addition to flaws in the scoring system, the group discussed other factors that may be contributing to inaccurate scores, such as lack of capacity at HUD field offices to monitor inspections and inadequate inspector training. Senior HUD PIH officials discussed some potential changes to the scoring system and protocol, as well as measures to increase enforcement including shorter inspection notification periods and requiring inspections of properties currently undergoing rehabilitation.

CLPHA remains concerned about the current inspection protocol’s ability to distinguish between safe and unsafe properties, and HUD’s lack of oversight for owners whose properties receive failing scores. HUD should also acknowledge that reduced capital and operating funds for public housing have greatly affected the ability of PHAs to maintain safe living conditions for their residents and that a comprehensive approach is needed through inspection protocol changes, stricter enforcement, and adequate funding for maintenance and repairs.

HUD officials reported that they will continue to explore possible changes and are considering holding listening sessions with PHAs and property owners in the spring, with a potential demonstration project for a new inspection protocol beginning in summer 2019.

In other news, HUD officials also reported at the meeting that a notice on the Annual Contributions Contract (ACC) is expected shortly. CLPHA strongly advocated for reconsideration of HUD’s earlier changes to the ACC.

Contact CLPHA Research & Policy Analyst Emily Warren for questions or further information at ewarren@clpha.org.