Home Investment Partnerships Reauthorization and Reform Act
Section 501 · Sec. 501 ·
What this chapter is about
This part rewrites much of a federal housing program run through states and cities. It makes the program last without an end date. It raises the income line for who it can help. It lets some places use the money for water lines and roads. Small building projects skip the study of effects on nature.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``The HOME Investment Partnerships Program under subtitle A is hereby authorized.''.”
The section rewrites section 205 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act so that it reads as a plain authorization of the HOME Investment Partnerships Program under subtitle A.
What the document actually says
“``The HOME Investment Partnerships Program under subtitle A is hereby authorized.''.”
That sentence, in plain words
The HOME program is authorized. That is the whole sentence.
What this is about
The older wording set out money for named years. Those years run out. This wording does not, so the program stands until Congress changes it.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“Section 104(6)(B) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12704(6)(B)) is amended by striking ``significant''.”
The section amends section 104(6)(B) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act by striking the word significant from the definition of a community housing development organization.
What the document actually says
“Section 104(6)(B) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12704(6)(B)) is amended by striking ``significant''.”
That sentence, in plain words
One word comes out of a definition in an older law. The word is significant. Nothing goes in to replace it.
What this is about
The definition says what a community housing group is. That word set a bar the group had to clear. Taking it out lowers the bar.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“by striking ``households that qualify as low-income families'' and inserting ``families with a household income that does not exceed 100 percent of the median family income of the area, as determined by the Secretary''; and”
The section amends section 214(2) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act to replace the reference to low-income families with families whose household income does not exceed 100 percent of area median family income as the Secretary determines. It makes matching changes in section 271(c), with adjustments for smaller and larger families.
What the document actually says
“by striking ``households that qualify as low-income families'' and inserting ``families with a household income that does not exceed 100 percent of the median family income of the area, as determined by the Secretary''; and”
That sentence, in plain words
Words about low income families come out of an older law. New words go in. They cover families whose income is at or below the middle income for the area.
What this is about
The middle income where a family lives is the yardstick. The old test used a lower line. The new one reaches more families.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “may not”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(2) Limitation.--The Secretary may not restrict the choice by a participating jurisdiction of rehabilitation, substantial rehabilitation, new construction, reconstruction, acquisition, or other eligible housing uses authorized in paragraph (1) unless the restriction is explicitly authorized under section 223(2).''.”
The section rewrites section 212(a)(2) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act to bar the Secretary from restricting a participating jurisdiction's choice among rehabilitation, substantial rehabilitation, new construction, reconstruction, acquisition, or other eligible housing uses, unless the restriction is explicitly authorized under section 223(2).
What the document actually says
“``(2) Limitation.--The Secretary may not restrict the choice by a participating jurisdiction of rehabilitation, substantial rehabilitation, new construction, reconstruction, acquisition, or other eligible housing uses authorized in paragraph (1) unless the restriction is explicitly authorized under section 223(2).''.”
That sentence, in plain words
The housing agency may not limit what a place chooses to do. That covers fixing up homes, building new ones, or buying them. Only one part of the older law allows a limit.
What this is about
A participating jurisdiction is a state or city in the program. It picks how to spend its share. This keeps that choice in local hands.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: participating jurisdictionsHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“A participating jurisdiction may use funds provided under this subtitle for infrastructure improvements, including the installation or repair of water and sewer lines, sidewalks, roads, and utility connections if--”
The section adds a new paragraph (4) to section 212(a) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act letting a participating jurisdiction spend the money on infrastructure, including water and sewer lines, sidewalks, roads, and utility connections, where it does not get assistance under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 and where the work is directly related to and within or next to housing assisted under the subtitle or under section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The labor standards in section 110 of the 1974 Act apply to that work, and nothing in the paragraph puts HOME program requirements on housing that only benefits from the infrastructure. The Secretary must issue rules within a year.
What the document actually says
“A participating jurisdiction may use funds provided under this subtitle for infrastructure improvements, including the installation or repair of water and sewer lines, sidewalks, roads, and utility connections if--”
That sentence, in plain words
A place in the program may spend the money on pipes and roads. That covers water lines, sewer lines, paths, and hookups.
What this is about
Only places outside another block grant program may do this. The work must sit next to housing the program helped. Rules on worker pay still apply.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“Section 212(e)(1) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12742(e)(1)) is amended by striking the second sentence.”
The section strikes the second sentence of section 212(e)(1) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, which sits in the provision on per unit investment limitations.
What the document actually says
“Section 212(e)(1) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12742(e)(1)) is amended by striking the second sentence.”
That sentence, in plain words
One sentence comes out of an older rule. It is the second one. Nothing goes in to replace it.
What this is about
That rule caps how much may go into a single home. This law does not say what the struck sentence said. It is not indexed here.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: participating jurisdictionsHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(A) the unit is occupied by a tenant receiving tenant-based rental assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f); ``(B) the contribution of the tenant toward rent does not exceed the amount permitted under the assistance described in subparagraph (A); and”
The section adds a new paragraph (7) to section 215(a) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act providing that a rental unit qualifies as affordable housing where it is lived in by a tenant with a section 8 voucher, the tenant's share of the rent is no more than the voucher program allows, and the total rent is no more than the public housing agency has approved.
What the document actually says
“``(A) the unit is occupied by a tenant receiving tenant-based rental assistance under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f); ``(B) the contribution of the tenant toward rent does not exceed the amount permitted under the assistance described in subparagraph (A); and”
That sentence, in plain words
The home is lived in by a tenant with a voucher. The tenant's share of the rent is within what the voucher allows.
What this is about
A voucher pays part of a tenant's rent. The rest is the tenant's share. If both tests hold, the home counts as affordable here.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“(I) by striking ``95 percent'' and inserting ``110 percent''; and”
The section amends section 215(b) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act to raise the purchase price ceiling from 95 percent to 110 percent, and defines purchase price as the amount borrowed by the homebuyer or the estimated value after rehabilitation, which may be adjusted for the limits a resale restriction places on future value. It also makes the same change from 95 percent to 110 percent in section 245(b)(2), on asset recycling.
What the document actually says
“(I) by striking ``95 percent'' and inserting ``110 percent''; and”
That sentence, in plain words
One figure comes out of an older rule. A higher one goes in. It rises from 95 percent to 110 percent.
What this is about
The figure caps the price of a home the program may help buy. It is set against a local benchmark. Raising it lets the program reach costlier homes.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: participating jurisdictionsHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(iii) maintain long-term affordability through a shared equity ownership model, a community land trust, a limited equity cooperative, a community development corporation, or other mechanism approved by the Secretary”
The section adds a clause to section 215(b) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act allowing long-term affordability to be kept through a shared equity ownership model, a community land trust, a limited equity cooperative, a community development corporation, or another mechanism the Secretary approves, including through purchase options, rights of first refusal, or other preemptive rights to purchase.
What the document actually says
“``(iii) maintain long-term affordability through a shared equity ownership model, a community land trust, a limited equity cooperative, a community development corporation, or other mechanism approved by the Secretary”
That sentence, in plain words
A home can be kept affordable in more than one way. A land trust is one. A cooperative with limited equity is another. The housing agency may approve others.
What this is about
These models cap what an owner can sell for. That keeps the home within reach of the next buyer. The group may also have first call on buying it.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: participating jurisdictionsHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(II) at a price that is determined by a formula or method established by the participating jurisdiction that provides the owner with a reasonable return on investment, which may include a percentage of the cost of any improvements; or”
The section adds a new subparagraph (E) to section 215(b)(1) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act requiring restrictions set by the participating jurisdiction and found appropriate by the Secretary, including as to the useful life of the property, that either require any later purchase to be by a qualifying buyer at a price set by a local formula giving the owner a reasonable return, or recapture the investment to help other people, except where there are no net proceeds or they fall short of the assistance given.
What the document actually says
“``(II) at a price that is determined by a formula or method established by the participating jurisdiction that provides the owner with a reasonable return on investment, which may include a percentage of the cost of any improvements; or”
That sentence, in plain words
The price is set by a formula the local body writes. The owner still gets a fair return. Part of what improvements cost can count toward that.
What this is about
The other path is to take the aid back when the home is sold. That money then helps someone else. Neither applies if the sale leaves nothing over.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“the Secretary may permit a participating jurisdiction to allow a community land trust, housing cooperative, or a community development corporation that used assistance provided under this subtitle for the development of housing that meets the criteria under paragraph (1), to acquire the housing--”
The section lets the Secretary permit a participating jurisdiction to allow a community land trust, housing cooperative, or community development corporation that used HOME assistance to develop qualifying housing to acquire that housing under its purchase option, lease, or covenant. The purchase must be to enter the chain of title, to enable a purchase by a qualifying person on the group's waitlist, to carry out needed rehabilitation, to add a subsidy preserving affordability, or for another purpose the Secretary thinks fit, and the housing must then be sold within a reasonable time to a qualifying person.
What the document actually says
“the Secretary may permit a participating jurisdiction to allow a community land trust, housing cooperative, or a community development corporation that used assistance provided under this subtitle for the development of housing that meets the criteria under paragraph (1), to acquire the housing--”
That sentence, in plain words
A land trust or a housing group may buy the home back. It must have used this program's money to build it. The housing agency must allow it and the local body must agree.
What this is about
The group buys the home to pass it to the next family. It may also repair it or add money to keep it cheap. It must sell it on within a reasonable time.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: participating jurisdictionsHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(ii) orders for a permanent change of station.”
The section adds a new subsection (c) to section 215 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act letting a participating jurisdiction, on terms the Secretary sets, suspend or waive the income qualifications for housing whose owner is a member of a regular component of the armed forces or a member of the National Guard on the duty statuses named, and who has received temporary duty orders to deploy for at least 90 days to a place not within a reasonable distance of the home, or orders for a permanent change of station.
What the document actually says
“``(ii) orders for a permanent change of station.”
That sentence, in plain words
The member has orders to move to a new duty station for good.
What this is about
A service member who owns such a home may be sent away. Then the income rules can be set aside. The other path is orders to deploy for 90 days or more.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: participating jurisdictionsHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(A) the housing is the principal residence of an heir or beneficiary of the deceased owner, as defined by the Secretary; and ``(B) the heir or beneficiary, in accordance with terms established by the Secretary, assumes the duties and obligations of the deceased owner with respect to funds provided under this title.''.”
The section provides that housing that qualified before an owner's death keeps its status as affordable housing where it is the principal residence of an heir or beneficiary and that person takes on the deceased owner's duties and obligations for the funds provided under the title.
What the document actually says
“``(A) the housing is the principal residence of an heir or beneficiary of the deceased owner, as defined by the Secretary; and ``(B) the heir or beneficiary, in accordance with terms established by the Secretary, assumes the duties and obligations of the deceased owner with respect to funds provided under this title.''.”
That sentence, in plain words
The home must be where the heir mainly lives. The heir must also take on what the dead owner owed under the program.
What this is about
A home in the program carries duties with it. Those do not end when the owner dies. An heir who takes them on keeps the home in the program.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“(1) by striking subsection (g); and (2) by redesignating subsection (h) as subsection (g).”
The section strikes subsection (g) of section 218 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, which carried the expiration of the right to draw HOME Investment Trust Fund money, and redesignates the following subsection.
What the document actually says
“(1) by striking subsection (g); and (2) by redesignating subsection (h) as subsection (g).”
That sentence, in plain words
One part of an older law is struck out. The part after it moves up to take its place.
What this is about
The struck part set a deadline for drawing the money. After it a place lost the right. That deadline is now gone.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“If any funds reserved under subsection (a) remain uninvested for a period of 24 months, the Secretary shall make such funds available to the participating jurisdiction for any eligible activities under this title without regard to whether a community housing development organization materially participates in the use of such funds.''.”
The section rewrites section 231(b) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act so that money reserved for community housing development organizations and left uninvested for 24 months is made available to the participating jurisdiction for any eligible activity, whether or not such an organization takes part.
What the document actually says
“If any funds reserved under subsection (a) remain uninvested for a period of 24 months, the Secretary shall make such funds available to the participating jurisdiction for any eligible activities under this title without regard to whether a community housing development organization materially participates in the use of such funds.''.”
That sentence, in plain words
Some money is held back for one kind of group. If it sits unused for 24 months, it is freed. The place may then use it for any allowed purpose.
What this is about
A set-aside can go unspent if no group takes it up. Then the money would sit idle. This rule puts it back to work.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(1) New construction infill housing projects. ``(2) Acquisition of real property for affordable housing purposes. ``(3) Rehabilitation projects carried out pursuant to section 212(a)(1). ``(4) New construction projects of 15 units or less.”
The section adds a new subsection (e) to section 288 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act exempting four categories from environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969: new construction infill housing projects, acquisition of real property for affordable housing, rehabilitation projects under section 212(a)(1), and new construction projects of 15 units or fewer. An infill housing project is newly defined as a residential project inside a municipality, adequately served by existing utilities and public services, on no more than 5 acres of previously disturbed land, and largely surrounded by other development.
What the document actually says
“``(1) New construction infill housing projects. ``(2) Acquisition of real property for affordable housing purposes. ``(3) Rehabilitation projects carried out pursuant to section 212(a)(1). ``(4) New construction projects of 15 units or less.”
That sentence, in plain words
Four kinds of work are named. New homes filling a gap in a built-up place. Buying land for affordable homes. Fixing up homes. New projects of 15 homes or fewer.
What this is about
A federal project usually needs a study of its effect on nature. These four skip it by law. The agency does not choose.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“the Secretary shall ensure that a project that has undergone an environmental review under this section shall not be subject to a duplicative environmental review solely due to the addition, substitution, or reallocation of other sources of Federal assistance, if the scope, scale, and location of the project remain substantially unchanged.”
The section adds a new subsection (f) to section 288 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act requiring the Secretary, so far as practicable and permitted by law, to see that a project already reviewed is not reviewed again simply because federal funding sources are added, swapped, or moved, where the scope, scale, and location stay substantially the same. The Secretary must also provide by regulation for coordinating review responsibilities with other federal agencies, and a project may not be reviewed again where a substantially similar review has been completed by a body designated under section 104(g)(1) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 or one the Secretary finds has equivalent authority. The Secretary must issue rules within a year.
What the document actually says
“the Secretary shall ensure that a project that has undergone an environmental review under this section shall not be subject to a duplicative environmental review solely due to the addition, substitution, or reallocation of other sources of Federal assistance, if the scope, scale, and location of the project remain substantially unchanged.”
That sentence, in plain words
A project already checked for its effect on nature is not checked twice. Adding or swapping federal money does not trigger a new check. That holds if the project stays much the same in size and place.
What this is about
A project can draw money from several federal sources. Each could ask for its own study. This says one study is enough.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (in this subsection referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall complete a review of the implementation of the Build America, Buy America Act (title IV of division G of Public Law 117-58; 42 U.S.C. 8301 note) with respect to the activities assisted under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12721 et seq.).”
The section requires the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to complete, within 180 days of enactment, a review of how the Build America, Buy America Act is applied to activities assisted under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, to issue updated guidance within 90 days of that review, and to report on both to the House Committee on Financial Services and the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs within 270 days of enactment.
What the document actually says
“the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (in this subsection referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall complete a review of the implementation of the Build America, Buy America Act (title IV of division G of Public Law 117-58; 42 U.S.C. 8301 note) with respect to the activities assisted under title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12721 et seq.).”
That sentence, in plain words
The housing agency must review how one law is being applied. That law is about buying American goods. The review covers work paid for by this housing program.
What this is about
The review is due within 180 days. Guidance follows within 90 days of that. A report to two committees in Congress is due within 270 days.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(1) the recipient of assistance under this title is-- ``(A) a State recipient pursuant to section 216; or ``(B) a participating jurisdiction that received a total allocation of less than $3,000,000 in the most recent fiscal year pursuant to section 216; and ``(2) the total number of dwelling units assisted as a part of such activity is not more than 50.''.”
The section adds a new section 291 to title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act providing that the requirements of section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, and any implementing regulations or guidance, do not apply to an assisted activity involving rehabilitation, construction, or other development of housing where the recipient is a State recipient or a participating jurisdiction that got less than $3,000,000 in the most recent fiscal year, and the activity assists no more than 50 dwelling units.
What the document actually says
“``(1) the recipient of assistance under this title is-- ``(A) a State recipient pursuant to section 216; or ``(B) a participating jurisdiction that received a total allocation of less than $3,000,000 in the most recent fiscal year pursuant to section 216; and ``(2) the total number of dwelling units assisted as a part of such activity is not more than 50.''.”
That sentence, in plain words
The place taking the money must be a state or a small one. A small one got less than three million dollars last year. The work must cover 50 homes or fewer.
What this is about
The rules set aside here come from a 1968 law. Those rules are not indexed on this site. Where both tests hold, they do not apply.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(4) Reallocation not available for certain jurisdictions.--The Secretary may decline to make a reallocation available to a jurisdiction eligible for such reallocation if such jurisdiction has failed to meet or comply with any requirement under this title.''.”
The section adds a new paragraph (4) to section 217(d) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act letting the Secretary decline to give a reallocation to an otherwise eligible jurisdiction that has failed to meet or comply with any requirement of the title. It also rewrites paragraph (1) to set out which jurisdictions are eligible, and separately lets the Secretary remove a participating jurisdiction from reallocations on a finding of noncompliance.
What the document actually says
“``(4) Reallocation not available for certain jurisdictions.--The Secretary may decline to make a reallocation available to a jurisdiction eligible for such reallocation if such jurisdiction has failed to meet or comply with any requirement under this title.''.”
That sentence, in plain words
The housing agency may hold back money from a place. That happens when the place has not met the rules of this part of the law.
What this is about
A reallocation is money passed on from a place that did not use it. Others share it out. A place that breaks the rules can be left out.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(ii) where existing affordable housing is no longer financially viable due to unforeseen acts or occurrences beyond the reasonable contemplation or control of the participating jurisdiction in which the affordable housing is located or the owner of the affordable housing that significantly impact the financial or physical condition of the affordable housing, as determined by the Secretary; and''.”
The section rewrites the exception in section 215(a)(1)(E) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act. It keeps the existing exception for foreclosure or transfer in lieu of foreclosure and adds a second, where existing affordable housing is no longer financially viable because of unforeseen events beyond the reasonable contemplation or control of the jurisdiction or the owner that significantly affect the financial or physical condition of the housing, as the Secretary determines.
What the document actually says
“``(ii) where existing affordable housing is no longer financially viable due to unforeseen acts or occurrences beyond the reasonable contemplation or control of the participating jurisdiction in which the affordable housing is located or the owner of the affordable housing that significantly impact the financial or physical condition of the affordable housing, as determined by the Secretary; and''.”
That sentence, in plain words
A second way out is added. It applies when the housing can no longer pay its way. The cause must be something nobody could have foreseen or controlled. The housing agency decides.
What this is about
The rules keep a home affordable for a set span. The first way out is foreclosure. This adds a way out when the building cannot be kept going.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall not”Who acts: participating jurisdictionsHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(1) The housing is affordable housing with not more than 4 dwelling units, each of which is made available for rental. ``(2) Each dwelling unit in the housing bears rent in an amount that complies with the requirements described in paragraph (1)(A).”
The section adds a new subsection (e) to section 225 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act providing that paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) of subsection (d) do not apply to housing of no more than four rental units where the rent complies with the relevant requirement, each unit is accompanied by a low-income family, no unit is refused to a section 8 voucher holder because of that status, the housing complies with the affordability period requirement, and the participating jurisdiction monitors compliance in a way consistent with section 226(b).
What the document actually says
“``(1) The housing is affordable housing with not more than 4 dwelling units, each of which is made available for rental. ``(2) Each dwelling unit in the housing bears rent in an amount that complies with the requirements described in paragraph (1)(A).”
That sentence, in plain words
The building holds four homes or fewer. Each is offered for rent. The rent on each one meets the rules already set.
What this is about
Some tenant protection rules are set aside for these small buildings. Six tests must all be met first. One of them bars turning away a voucher holder.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
“``(A) is not managed by, or an affiliate of, a for profit organization; ``(B) has as a primary purpose of acquiring, developing, or holding land to provide housing that is permanently affordable to low- and moderate-income persons; ``(C) monitors properties to ensure affordability is preserved;”
The section adds a definition of community land trust to section 104 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act. It is a nonprofit, a State, a unit of local government, or an instrumentality of one, not run by or tied to a for profit organization, whose main purpose is acquiring, developing, or holding land for permanently affordable housing, that monitors properties to preserve affordability, that uses a ground lease, deed covenant, or similar enforceable measure keeping housing affordable for at least 30 years and letting people rent or buy, and that keeps preemptive options to buy the property back.
What the document actually says
“``(A) is not managed by, or an affiliate of, a for profit organization; ``(B) has as a primary purpose of acquiring, developing, or holding land to provide housing that is permanently affordable to low- and moderate-income persons; ``(C) monitors properties to ensure affordability is preserved;”
That sentence, in plain words
The body must not be run by a company out to make money. Its main aim is to hold land for homes people can always afford. It must watch its properties to keep them that way.
What this is about
A community land trust holds the land under a home. That keeps the price of the home down. The affordability must last at least 30 years.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“by striking ``to be developed, sponsored, or owned by community housing development organizations'' and inserting ``when a community housing development organization materially participates in the ownership or development of that housing, as determined by the Secretary''.”
The section amends the first sentence of section 231(a) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act so that the set-aside applies where a community housing development organization materially participates in the ownership or development of the housing, as the Secretary determines, rather than where the organization develops, sponsors, or owns it.
What the document actually says
“by striking ``to be developed, sponsored, or owned by community housing development organizations'' and inserting ``when a community housing development organization materially participates in the ownership or development of that housing, as determined by the Secretary''.”
That sentence, in plain words
Old words about who builds or owns the housing come out. New words go in. They ask whether the group takes a real part in it.
What this is about
The old test looked at who held the title. The new one looks at the group's role. The housing agency decides what counts.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: participating jurisdictionsHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(3) Inclusion in performance report and publication.--A participating jurisdiction shall include in the performance report of the participating jurisdiction submitted to the Secretary under section 108(a), and make available to the public, the results of each review conducted under paragraph (1).''.”
The section rewrites section 226(b) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act so that a review by a local government must include an onsite inspection for compliance with housing codes and other regulations, a review by a State must include an onsite inspection against a national standard the Secretary sets, and the results of each review must go into the jurisdiction's performance report and be made public.
What the document actually says
“``(3) Inclusion in performance report and publication.--A participating jurisdiction shall include in the performance report of the participating jurisdiction submitted to the Secretary under section 108(a), and make available to the public, the results of each review conducted under paragraph (1).''.”
That sentence, in plain words
A place must put the results of each review in its yearly report. That report goes to the housing agency. It must also make the results public.
What this is about
A town checks against its own housing codes. A state checks against one national rule. Either way somebody must go and see the home.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“``(4) reduce payments to the participating jurisdiction under this subtitle by an amount equal to the amount of such payments that were not expended by the participating jurisdiction in accordance with this title.''.”
The section amends section 223 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, renaming it to cover program enforcement and penalties for noncompliance, extending it to provisions applicable throughout the affordability period required by section 215(a)(1)(E), and adding a new remedy of reducing payments to a participating jurisdiction by the amount it did not spend in accordance with the title.
What the document actually says
“``(4) reduce payments to the participating jurisdiction under this subtitle by an amount equal to the amount of such payments that were not expended by the participating jurisdiction in accordance with this title.''.”
That sentence, in plain words
The housing agency may cut what it pays a place. The cut equals the money that place did not spend by the rules.
What this is about
The older law set out penalties for misusing money. This widens them to any failure to comply. The new remedy is a matching cut.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“in paragraph (2), by striking ``$500,000'' each place that term appears and inserting ``$750,000'';”
The section amends section 217(b) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act to raise the minimum allocation figure from $500,000 to $750,000 wherever it appears in paragraph (2), makes matching changes in paragraph (3) that keep the older figure for allocations before the Act's enactment, and strikes paragraph (4).
What the document actually says
“in paragraph (2), by striking ``$500,000'' each place that term appears and inserting ``$750,000'';”
That sentence, in plain words
One figure comes out of an older rule. Every time it shows up, it is swapped. It rises from five hundred thousand to seven hundred fifty thousand.
What this is about
The figure is the smallest share a place can get. Below it, a place is treated differently. The older figure still governs allocations made before this law.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “is amended”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 501 in the PDF
What the document says
“(1) by striking ``Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act'' each place that term appears and inserting ``McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act'';”
The section makes technical and conforming amendments throughout the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, updating the name of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act and the name of the House Committee on Financial Services, updating the table of contents for sections 205, 223, and the new 291, correcting cross references and subcommittee names, fixing the spelling of grandchildren, and redesignating several paragraphs.
What the document actually says
“(1) by striking ``Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act'' each place that term appears and inserting ``McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act'';”
That sentence, in plain words
An old name for a law comes out wherever it appears. The current name goes in.
What this is about
A conforming change updates words that no longer match. Committees get renamed and laws get renamed. These changes add no new rule.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
Each distinct thing the section does across its twenty-two subsections: the permanent authorization, the change to the community housing development organization definition, the raised income line, the limit on the Secretary restricting a jurisdiction's choices, the new use for infrastructure in nonentitlement areas, the removal of the per unit investment sentence, the rental and home ownership qualification changes, the shared equity and resale restriction rules, the purchase by a land trust or cooperative, the military and heir exceptions, the end of the deadline for drawing funds, the recapture and reuse of the set-aside, the asset recycling change, the environmental review exemptions and the infill housing definition, the Build America review, the new section 291, the reallocation rules, the affordability restriction exception, the tenant protection exception, the community land trust definition, the set-aside participation test, the administrative reforms, and the raised minimum allocation.
The technical and conforming amendments in subsection (v), which correct names, cross references, and spelling, are recorded as a group rather than one by one. Purely mechanical redesignations are recorded only where they change what somebody must do.
The section works by amending the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, which is not indexed here, so nothing is recorded about the rest of the HOME program. The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, the United States Housing Act of 1937, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and the Build America, Buy America Act are likewise not indexed.
