Proposed budgets for HUD for FY2011

All interested parties have submitted their version of what the 2011 budget should look like for HUD.  Although the Senate version is not finalized yet as it has only passed out of Appropriations Committee and will not be voted on until after the November elections, it offers a glimpse of what the Senate is thinking.  You can find a handy chart at either NLIHC or HAC.  NLIHC's chart has previous years for comparison and some more details, while HAC seem to have some Senate line items that NLIHC has not filled out (yet?).

HUD apparently will definitely proceed with the of merging tenant-based rental assistance programs under the same umbrella, with Section 811 Mainstream vouchers and others moving under the Section 8 program for the first time.  This was proposed as part of Transforming Rental Assistance, which Congress declined to fund.

It is interesting to see that Congress has ignored the President's requests in some situations, such as declining to reduce the amounts for Public Housing, CDBG, HOME, Native American Housing, etc. as suggested by the Administration.  In the case of HOME, CDBG, 811 and 202 funds, I've heard HUD staff say that they feel that the ARRA monies funded some of the projects that would've been in the pipeline under those programs, and thus there is not as much of a need for those programs to be funded at previous levels.   I'm not sure I appreciate the logic of using ARRA funds to stimulate the economy, and then reversing the "stimulus" effect by reducing the funding for those programs.

Project-based rental assistance continue to see funding increases, up to $9.376 billion (at least), a significant increase from $5.037 billion in 2006.  Overall, the current Administration has been very good for housing, with an increase from $34.27 billion in 2006 to $41.59 billion proposed (by the Administration) for 2011.

Some updates on innovative programs proposed:

• Sustainable Communities budgeted as requested at $150 million
• Choice Neighborhoods Initiative, the planned replacement for HOPE VI, received support in the Senate at $250 million, but the House stuck with Hope VI and reduced the amount to $200 million.
• As noted earlier, Congress declined to fund PETRA (Preservation, Enhancement, Transformation of Rental Assistance).  Without studying the issue further, the Congress is understandably leery about the substantial impact it could have on housing authorities around the country and their tenants.

While there have been increases in funding for housing under President Obama as compared to near-constant proposals to cut housing programs under President Bush, the reality is with the current recession and the foreclosure crisis, there is even more demand for affordable housing.  It is very unlikely that enough money will ever be appropriated to meet the need for affordable housing, so it is very important that a multiple-pronged approach should be taken; not only to increase funding, but also to reduce barriers that communities often put up that makes housing more expensive.