AJJCS
Products News Help
Client Sign In

Biden Administration Introduces "Renters Bill of Rights"

person A.J. Johnson today 03/12/2023

In late January 2023, the Biden administration released a Blueprint for a Renters Bill of Rights.  This blueprint describes federal actions around five guiding renter protections: Safe, Quality, Accessible, and Affordable Housing; Clear and Fair Leases; Education; Enforcement and Enhancement of Renters Rights; the Right to Organize; and Eviction Prevention, Diversion, and Relief.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) announced it will identify the opportunities and challenges of adopting and enforcing tenant protections, including policies that limit egregious rent increases at properties with Government Sponsored Enterprise (GSE) backed mortgages going forward.

FHFA is also going to publish a GSE Look-Up Tool to determine if a property is backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac financing and requires a 30-day notice to vacate for non-payment of rent. HUD will also issue a notice of proposed rulemaking requiring that PHAs and owners of project-based rental assistance properties provide no less than a 30-day notice of lease termination due to nonpayment of rent.

The blueprint also recommends that local governments take the following actions: (1) immediately seal eviction filings and only unseal them in the case of a decision against the tenant; (2) provide the right to counsel in eviction proceedings; and (3) prohibit source of income discrimination.

Following is a description of the "five principles" outlined in the Blueprint.

First Principle: Access to Safe, Quality, Accessible, and Affordable Housing

Renters should have access to housing that is safe, decent, and affordable and should pay no more than 30 percent of household income on housing costs. Owners of rental housing and state and local governments should ensure that homes for rent meet habitability standards and are free of health and safety hazards, such as lead or mold. In addition, owners should provide services and amenities as advertised or included in the lease (such as utility costs and functional appliances) and ensure that the residential housing unit is well maintained (including common areas). Renters should face minimal barriers when applying for housing and receiving housing assistance, which includes minimally burdensome application and documentation requirements and fair and equal tenant screening. Increases in rents should be reasonable, with the acknowledgment that rents may need to increase to cover operating costs. These increases should be transparent and fair to protect against gouging.

In 2019, almost 25% of renters spent half their income on rent. Nationally, rents rose 26% during the pandemic. Limited housing supply has created more competition for fewer available units, which gives owners even more leverage in deciding to whom to rent to, what lease terms to offer, and whether and how much to raise rents. At the same time, the housing stock in America is aging, and more rental housing is facing obsolescence or poor housing conditions.

Perhaps in recognition of the fact that private owners who do not operate under any programmatic regulations (i.e., conventional housing) are not responsible for making housing affordable. These owners operate rental housing for the profits that can be made from such housing. Offering incentives for affordability is the responsibility of the government, at the federal, state, and local levels. To accomplish this, the Biden Administration has proposed the largest expansion of the Housing Choice Voucher program in decades. In addition to this step, the Administration has proposed the following:

  • The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will explore ways to expand the use of its authority under the FTC Act to take action against acts and practices that unfairly prevent consumers from obtaining and retaining housing.
  • As announced in November, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), an independent agency, will increase affordability in the multifamily rental market by classifying multifamily loans with loan agreements that restrict rents at levels affordable to households with incomes between 80 and 120 percent of Area Median Income as "mission-driven." In 2023, FHFA required that at least 50 percent of all Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae purchases of multifamily loans be mission-driven. In 2022, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae purchased a combined $142 billion in multifamily loans supporting over one million units. If the same activity holds in 2023, this will mean an investment in approximately 700,000 affordable units.

Second Principle: Clear & Fair Leases

Renters should have a clear and fair lease that has defined rental terms, rights, and responsibilities. Leases should not include mandatory arbitration clauses, unauthorized terms, hidden or illegal fees, false representations, or other unfair or deceptive practices. A lease should provide a transparent policy regarding security deposits, with those deposits being appropriately sized and placed in an interest-bearing account for the duration of the lease. The lease should also provide reasonable advance notice of actions related to the unit, including notice of entry for inspection by the housing provider and significant changes to the unit. Finally, the lease terms should be written in simple and clear language accessible to the renter, and the leasing process should ensure tenants understand the terms of the lease through a plain-language briefing.

A lease establishes the foundation for the housing provider and tenant relationship, highlighting the rights, responsibilities, and recourse that exists for both parties. A lease covers the terms for what is likely the largest single expense a household makes each month and over the course of a year. The trend of more leases with problematic provisions can be partially attributed to the increased use of shared forms, which are easily accessible through the internet and may include terms that are not legally enforceable in the state or locality in which the property is located.

To ensure fair leases to the greatest extent possible, the Administration is announcing the following new actions:

  • USDA will institute a broad set of actions that will advance clear leases and ensure tenants can seek compliance with lease terms without facing retaliation across its portfolio of 400,000 units of multifamily rental housing.
  • Specifically, USDA is developing a clear and fair lease that is similar to the model lease used in HUD Section 8 properties.
  • USDA will also create a tenant grievance FAQ outlining clear steps for tenants appealing a management decision and will distribute it to owners and management agents,  and ask for distribution to tenants and tenant advocacy groups.
  • Further, USDA Rural Development is working to create a Tenant Rights and Responsibilities brochure modeled after the HUD Multifamily brochure for assisted housing residents, increasing consistency between the two agencies and clarifying Rural Development tenants’ rights and responsibilities.
  • USDA will explore updating its regulations to require borrowers with federal credit from the department’s Rural Housing Service to utilize the brochure.

Owners and managers in the RD Section 515 Program should be prepared for this upcoming change. A good starting point is a review of the current HUD Model Lease for Multifamily Housing and the HUD Rights & Responsibilities Brochure. This will give operators of Section 515 housing an idea of what may be coming down the road.

Third Principle: Education, Enforcement, and Enhancement of Rights

The Administration position is that Federal, state, and local governments should do all they can to ensure renters know their existing legal rights and to protect renters from unlawful discrimination and exclusion that can take many different forms.

The Fair Housing Act (FHA) bans discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), disability, familial status, and national origin, including practices that have an unjustified disparate impact on a protected class. The Administration proposes to expand the FHA to prohibit discrimination based on source of income.

In order to implement this third principle, HUD is finalizing a rule to clarify that the Fair Housing Act continues to bar practices with unjustified discriminatory effects notwithstanding efforts to weaken its reach. In addition, HUD has published a proposed Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule to strengthen and better align grantee planning efforts to advance fair housing goals.

The federal government has advanced other rights beyond those protected by the Fair Housing Act. For example, discrimination against a holder of a Housing Choice Voucher is banned in the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, which is the largest affordable housing production program in the country. The Administration has announced the following new actions:

Tenant Background Checks:

  • The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has said it will identify guidance or rules that it can issue to ensure that the background screening industry adheres to the law and coordinate law enforcement efforts with the FTC to hold tenant background check companies accountable for having reasonable procedures to ensure accurate information in the credit reporting system.
  • HUD, FHFA, FTC, and USDA have said they will work with CFPB to release best practices on the use of tenant screening reports, including the importance of communicating clearly to tenants the use of tenant background checks in denying rental applications or increasing fees and providing tenants the opportunity to address inaccurate information contained within background screening reports. HUD, FHFA, and USDA have said they will strongly encourage property owners in their respective portfolios to align with these best practices and inform them of any additional relevant legal requirements in their respective portfolios. HUD will also release guidance addressing the use of tenant screening algorithms in ways that may violate the Fair Housing Act.

Source of Income Discrimination:

  • Discrimination based on a person’s source of income is not expressly prohibited under the Fair Housing Act. There are several ongoing agency actions that will be enhanced, consistent with agency authorities, to reduce such discrimination going forward. Consistent with existing LIHTC rules, the Treasury Department reiterates that LIHTC building owners should lease units in a manner consistent with HUD’s nondiscrimination rules and are prohibited from refusing to lease units to prospective tenants due to their status as holders of Housing Choice Vouchers or certificates of eligibility. The Treasury Department will meet with tenants, advocates, housing providers, and researchers to discuss ways to further the goals of tenant protections, including those around source of income, as well as broader issues of affordability and eviction prevention with respect to the LIHTC incentive.  HUD will explore opportunities to address source of income discrimination through guidance.

Fourth Principle: The Right to Organize

The Administration believes that renters should have the right to organize without obstruction or harassment from their housing provider or property manager and should not risk losing housing over organizing.

Tenants in different types of HUD and RD programs have recognized rights to organize. The Administration is not proposing that the government impose this requirement on non-assisted properties. They are taking the following steps:

  • The Department of Defense (DoD) commits to ensuring that military members living in DoD’s government-owned, government-controlled, or privatized housing have the right to organize and affirms their right to report housing issues to their chain of command and/or Military Housing Office without fear of retribution or retaliation.
  • HUD’s Office of Multifamily Housing is developing a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) to distribute appropriated funds to support tenant capacity-building activities, including tenant education and outreach.
  • HUD’s Office of Multifamily Housing will build on existing training and technical assistance strategies to promote engagement with residents and implementation of the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) resident protections, including grievance procedures, by owners of RAD-converted properties. This will include fact sheets and similar public resources, targeted outreach to owners of recently converted properties, and measures to refresh awareness of program expectations following the completion of the conversion process.

It should be noted that these actions will not apply to LIHTC properties.

Fifth Principle: Eviction Prevention, Diversion, and Relief

Before the pandemic, roughly 900,000 evictions were completed against tenants every single year. In order to reduce the number of evictions, the Administration is taking the following actions:

  • HUD will issue a notice of proposed rulemaking, to build upon the previously issued Interim Final Rule, which will propose to require that PHAs administering a public housing program and owners of project-based rental assistance properties provide no less than 30 days advanced notification of lease termination due to nonpayment of rent.
  • HUD will award $20 million for the Eviction Protection Grant Program in fiscal year 2023, which will fund non-profits and governmental entities to provide legal assistance to low-income tenants at risk of or subject to eviction.
  • FHFA, Freddie Mac, and Fannie Mae have indicated their commitment to publishing information about the Enterprise Look-Up Tools, which allow tenants to determine if their property is backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac financing and requires the 30-day notice to vacate for non-payment of rent. The Enterprises will continue to publish this information and assess how the individual tools might be enhanced to improve utility.

Bottom Line -  This "Renters Bill of Rights" will have a direct impact on federally assisted housing, with some minor effects across the non-federal universe of rental housing. The most immediate impact will be felt in the rural housing community due to the Rural Development Service development of a Model Lease and "Rights & Responsibilities" brochure. At the same time, the push to create "best practices" relative to applicant background screening should lead landlords to examine current practices - before they are forced to do so by state or local agencies.

With regard to the LIHTC program, The Treasury Department will meet with tenants, advocates, housing providers, and researchers to discuss ways to further the goals of tenant protections, including those around source of income, as well as broader issues of affordability and eviction prevention with respect to the LIHTC incentive. 

Latest Articles

Understanding Tariffs and Their Impact on Construction Costs

What Are Tariffs? A tariff is simply a tax imposed on imported goods. When products like building materials enter U.S. ports, paying the applicable tariff is a standard part of the customs process. Historical Context Tariffs have deep roots in American history. From the colonial era through the early 1900s, they served as the federal government s primary revenue source. They were relatively straightforward to enforce even before modern technology, as customs officers could inspect incoming shipments at ports and collect the appropriate fees. The federal government s limited taxing authority under the Constitution meant that a modern income tax was not legally permissible until the 16th Amendment was enacted in 1913. The Decline of Tariffs Despite their historical importance, tariffs have several inherent problems that led to their declining use over the past century: They disadvantaged U.S. agricultural interests and exporters as other countries implemented retaliatory trade barriers. The tax burden fell disproportionately on lower-income individuals who spend more of their income on basic necessities. They couldn t generate sufficient revenue to fund modern government operations. When the global economy faltered in 1930, many nations, including the U.S., implemented protective tariffs with the Smoot-Hawley Act. Most economists view this wave of protectionism as a contributing factor to the severity of the Great Depression. Learning from this experience, the U.S. and other advanced economies gradually reduced trade barriers during the postwar period to foster economic cooperation and peace. Current Tariff Landscape Even during periods of free trade enthusiasm, tariffs never disappeared entirely. They remained relatively low in recent years, dropping to 1.5% in 2017 after decades of bipartisan efforts to establish global trade agreements. The Trump administration increased rates to approximately 3% during his previous term, which President Biden largely maintained. According to the Yale Budget Lab, the Trump administration s announced policies would raise the average tariff to 22.5% higher than during the Smoot-Hawley era and roughly equivalent to 1909 levels. Implementation Authority The scale of newly announced tariffs is significantly larger than previous ones. They affect nearly all goods from every country worldwide and invoke emergency authority not previously used for this purpose. Tariffs Impact on Construction Costs Tariffs increase construction costs through several key mechanisms: Direct price increases on imported construction materials like steel, aluminum, lumber, and other building products. These higher costs are typically passed along to developers and ultimately to end consumers. The specific impact depends on several factors: Which materials are targeted The tariff rate percentages Availability of domestic alternatives Proportion of imported versus domestic materials used The recent tariffs on imports from China (20%), Mexico, and Canada (25%) have significant implications for construction. According to the National Association of Home Builders, these tariffs could increase builder costs by approximately $7,500 to $10,000 per home for residential construction. This impact is substantial because approximately 7% of all goods used in new residential construction are imported. Critical materials like softwood lumber come predominantly from Canada (72% of imports), while gypsum for drywall is mainly sourced from Mexico (74% of imports). Multifamily Construction Impact For multifamily construction specifically, with 46% of materials sourced from these countries and 35-50% of project costs tied to finished materials, tariffs could increase material costs by 7.5%, potentially raising total construction budgets by 3-4%. Broader Effects Beyond core construction materials, reciprocal tariffs may also influence other building-related imports, such as carpeting, electrical outlets, security equipment, furniture, and tools. Projects that have already been awarded but are not yet started are likely to experience the most significant impact. Industry forecasts suggest the construction industry will feel the brunt of tariff policy changes in late 2025 and early 2026. Meanwhile, due to tariff-related inflation concerns, the Federal Reserve is expected to maintain stable interest rates through most of 2025. Recent Developments Homebuilders have been relieved, as Canada and Mexico were exempted from the latest round of tariffs, protecting key lumber and drywall component imports. Additionally, a carveout exists for lumber and copper imports. These tariff developments are challenging the U.S. housing market, which is already struggling with supply constraints and affordability issues. Developers with affordable multifamily housing projects in the pipeline or underway but for which materials have not yet been purchased should prepare for these possible increases. Developers facing this uncertainty should take a proactive, strategic approach. Here are some of the steps they should consider: 1. Lock in Pricing Where Possible Negotiate Early Procurement Contracts: Secure pricing and delivery timelines now for materials that may be subject to tariffs. Bulk Purchasing: If financially feasible and storage is available, purchase critical materials before the tariff is implemented. 2. Revisit and Update Budgets Include Contingency Allowances: Adjust budgets to account for a potential spike in material costs (e.g., steel, aluminum, electrical components). Run Revised Pro Formas: Model project feasibility under different tariff scenarios to understand the margin of financial risk. 3. Communicate with Key Stakeholders Inform Lenders and Syndicators: Ensure your financial partners know potential cost escalations and any resulting impact on project viability or timelines. Coordinate with HFAs and Local Agencies: If the deal includes LIHTCs or public funding, discuss possible adjustments or relief options (e.g., basis boosts, revised gap financing). 4. Evaluate Alternative Materials and Suppliers Source Domestic Alternatives: Tariffs often target imported materials. Switching to local or tariff-exempt sources could mitigate cost hikes. Value Engineering: Reassess design specs to identify non-critical elements where substitutions could reduce costs. 5. Monitor Policy and Industry Updates Stay Informed: Watch for updates on tariff decisions and industry responses through trade associations (e.g., NAHB, NMHC). Engage in Advocacy: Support efforts to exempt affordable housing materials from tariffs or seek policy carve-outs. 6. Build Schedule Flexibility Buffer Time for Delays: Tariffs often disrupt supply chains, so build in extra time for procurement and delivery to avoid construction slowdowns. 7. Document Impacts Track Cost Changes: Keep records showing cost increases due to tariffs this can be useful when requesting additional funding or extensions from oversight bodies. Being proactive can help developers manage risk rather than be blindsided by rising costs. In this environment, a smart developer remains nimble, communicates clearly, and plans for the worst while hoping for the best.

Read full story

A. J. Johnson Partners with Mid-Atlantic AHMA for Training on Affordable Housing - May 2025

In May 2025, A. J. Johnson will partner with the MidAtlantic Affordable Housing Management Association for four live webinar training sessions for real estate professionals, particularly those in the affordable multifamily housing field. The following sessions will be presented: May 20: Acquisition/Rehab, Tenant Selection Plans & Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plans The complexities of affordable housing development don t stop at financing. When acquisition, rehabilitation, and layered funding programs collide, the stakes increase. Join industry expert A. J. Johnson for a practical and timely webinar on compliance pitfalls and planning strategies that can make or break your LIHTC project. This fast-paced session will break down the following: Acquisition-Rehab LIHTC Projects: How IRS rules impact "placed in service dates, acquisition credits, and meeting the 120-day qualification rule. The Available Unit Rule (AUR): Why this often-overlooked rule can lead to credit loss even on properties that no longer recertify. Tenant Selection Plans (TSPs): What every property manager must know about layered program requirements, lottery procedures, and legal screening standards. Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plans (AFHMPs): How to structure your outreach to comply with HUD requirements and avoid costly fair housing violations. Whether you're a developer, property manager, or compliance officer, this training will give you actionable strategies to keep your project on track and in full regulatory compliance. Who Should Attend - LIHTC developers, compliance specialists, property managers, syndicators, and housing agency staff responsible for acquisition, rehabilitation, and oversight of layered programs. May 21: HOTMA - Update on HUD Requirements On January 9, 2023, HUD published a final rule implementing The Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act (HOTMA), signed into law on July 29, 2016. This final rule was published in the Federal Register on February 14, 2023, and has yet to become effective for HUD programs. Virtually all HUD programs are impacted by the rule, as are the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Program and the Rural Development Section 515 Program. Since publishing the final rule in February 2023, HUD has provided additional guidance in implementing the rule, including extensions regarding implementation. This three-hour training will explain any updated HUD guidance and will cover the following areas: Definitional changes relating to earned and unearned income, non-recurring income, and foster children; Revised Income Exclusions; New requirements relative to Student Financial Assistance; Changes to the HUD permitted deductions from gross income, including a full review of the new "hardship exemptions; Brand new rules regarding assets; New Interim Recertification requirements; and The new definition of "annual income. May 22: Basic LIHTC Compliance This training is designed primarily for site and investment asset managers responsible for site-related asset management. It is especially beneficial to those managers who are relatively inexperienced in the tax credit program. It covers all aspects of credit related to on-site management, including the applicant interview process, determining resident eligibility (income and student issues), handling recertification, setting rents - including a full review of utility allowance requirements - lease issues, and the importance of maintaining the property. The training includes problems and questions to ensure students fully comprehend the material. May 28: Dealing with Income and Assets in Affordable Multifamily Housing - Course Overview This live webinar provides concentrated instruction on the required methodology for calculating and verifying income and determining the value of assets and income generated by those assets. The first section of the course involves a comprehensive discussion of employment income, military pay, pensions/social security, self-employment income, and child support. It concludes with workshop problems designed to test what the student has learned during the discussion phase of the training and serve to reinforce HUD-required techniques for determining income. The second component of the training focuses on a detailed discussion of requirements related to determining asset value and income. It applies to all federal housing programs, including the low-income housing tax credit, tax-exempt bonds, Section 8, Section 515, and HOME. Multiple types of assets are covered in terms of what constitutes an asset and how they must be verified. This section also concludes with problems designed to test the student s understanding of the basic requirements relative to assets. These sessions are part of a year-long collaboration between A. J. Johnson and MidAtlantic AHMA and are designed to provide affordable housing professionals with the knowledge needed to manage the complex requirements of the various agencies overseeing these programs effectively. Individuals or organizations interested in any (or all) training sessions may register by visiting either www.ajjcs.net or https://www.mid-atlanticahma.org.

Read full story

Crime-Free Ordinances: When Local Laws Conflict with Federal Fair Housing Protections

In August 2024, the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice issued a critical warning: municipal "crime-free rental housing and "nuisance property ordinances may violate federal fair housing laws. These ordinances effective in nearly 2,000 cities across 48 states until recently place landlords in a precarious position. While intended to reduce crime and maintain neighborhood stability, these measures often result in unintended discrimination and can expose landlords to significant legal liability. Notable Legal Cases Several landmark cases have established important precedents regarding crime-free ordinances: United States v. City of Hesperia (2023) In a groundbreaking case, the Justice Department secured a landmark agreement with the City of Hesperia, California, and the San Bernardino County Sheriff s Department to resolve racial and national origin discrimination allegations in their "crime-free rental housing program. The consent order required the city to completely repeal its crime-free program and ordinance marking the first resolution demanding the complete end of such a program. The settlement included a $950,000 payout, with $670,000 allocated to compensate individuals harmed by the program. The Justice Department alleged that the city and sheriff s department engaged in a pattern of discrimination against Black and Latinx individuals in violation of the Fair Housing Act and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 through the enforcement of their crime-free rental housing program. Briggs v. Norristown After experiencing the harmful impacts of a nuisance ordinance, Ms. Briggs, with support from the American Civil Liberties Union, filed a lawsuit against the City of Norristown. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) filed a complaint stating that the ordinance violated the Fair Housing Act based on its impact on women experiencing domestic violence. The case resulted in a settlement requiring Norristown to repeal its ordinances, and subsequently, Pennsylvania passed legislation banning localities from creating these types of ordinances. Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. (2015) In this influential Supreme Court case, the Court held that disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. This crucial decision established that housing policies with discriminatory effects even without discriminatory intent could violate the FHA. The ruling is particularly relevant to crime-free ordinances, which often produce disparate impacts on protected classes. The Legal Conflict: Federal Protections vs. Local Ordinances Landlords face a troubling dilemma: follow local crime-free ordinances and risk violating federal law, or disregard local requirements and face municipal penalties. This conflict stems from the fact that these ordinances may violate four major federal laws: 1. The Fair Housing Act Crime-free ordinances often have a disproportionate impact on protected classes. For example: When these ordinances require eviction based on arrests rather than convictions, they disproportionately affect Black and Hispanic tenants, who statistically face higher rates of police interaction regardless of criminal activity. Blanket policies requiring eviction of an entire household due to one member s criminal activity can discriminate against families with children, female-headed households, and certain cultural groups where extended family living arrangements are common. 2. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VI prohibits discrimination in programs receiving federal funds. When municipalities with crime-free ordinances receive federal housing funds, they may violate Title VI if: Their ordinances have disparate impacts on protected classes Implementation decisions are influenced by discriminatory intent or stereotypes about certain neighborhoods or demographic groups 3. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Crime-free ordinances may discriminate against individuals with disabilities in several ways: Automatic eviction for behavior related to mental health conditions without consideration of reasonable accommodations Policies that penalize multiple emergency service calls, which may disproportionately impact those with chronic health conditions requiring frequent medical assistance Exclusions of individuals with past substance use disorder convictions, despite recovery and treatment 4. The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) VAWA specifically protects victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking from housing discrimination. Crime-free ordinances often violate these protections by: Requiring eviction when police are called to a property multiple times, discouraging victims from seeking help Failing to distinguish between perpetrators and victims when criminal activity occurs Treating domestic disturbances as "nuisances rather than recognizing them as situations where victims need protection Problematic Practices in Crime-Free Ordinances Collective Punishment: Holding Entire Households Accountable One of the most troubling aspects of many crime-free ordinances is the requirement to evict entire households based on one individual s actions. This approach: Punishes innocent family members who had no knowledge of or participation in criminal activity Creates homelessness risks for vulnerable household members, including children, elderly relatives, and individuals with disabilities Disproportionately impacts communities where multi-generational or extended family living arrangements are cultural norms. Blanket Exclusions Based on Criminal Records Many ordinances include overly broad exclusions for individuals with criminal records: Lifetime bans for certain offenses, regardless of rehabilitation or time elapsed Failure to consider the nature, severity, or relevance of the criminal conduct to tenant suitability No individualized assessment of actual risk to property or other tenants Exclusion Based on Arrests Rather Than Convictions Some ordinances allow or require action against tenants based merely on arrests: Violates the presumption of innocence It has a disparate impact on communities of color, which experience higher rates of arrests that do not lead to convictions Creates housing instability based on unproven allegations rather than established facts Automatic Exclusion for Any Criminal Conviction Overly broad policies that automatically deny housing based on any criminal history: Fail to distinguish between violent crimes and minor offenses Ignore evidence of rehabilitation and the age of convictions Create permanent barriers to housing for individuals who have served their sentences and are working to reintegrate into society. Penalizing Emergency Service Calls Particularly problematic are provisions that treat emergency calls as "nuisances : Discourages tenants from seeking emergency medical assistance Forces vulnerable individuals to choose between needed help and keeping their housing Creates dangerous situations where tenants delay calling for assistance during genuine emergencies. Punishing Victims of Domestic Violence Perhaps most concerning is how these ordinances often penalize victims: Treating domestic violence incidents as "nuisance activities requiring eviction Failing to distinguish between calls made by victims versus perpetrators Creating a situation where victims must choose between enduring abuse in silence or risking homelessness. Legal Protections and Ongoing Developments The legal landscape around crime-free ordinances continues to evolve. In states like Illinois, legislation has been enacted to protect survivors of domestic or sexual violence and individuals with disabilities from being penalized due to calls to police for assistance. The Illinois Department of Human Rights and the UIC Law School Fair Housing Legal Support Center and Clinic have developed a guidebook addressing the fair housing implications of nuisance and crime-free ordinances. In 2024, additional cases have further clarified the legal boundaries of these ordinances: A case against a municipality alleged violations of both the Americans with Disabilities Act and Fair Housing Act for enforcing crime-free housing ordinances that denied tenants with mental health disabilities equal access to emergency response services. The consent decree required the municipality to revise its program rules and enforcement practices and adopt non-discrimination policies. The Department of Justice has increased enforcement actions against localities with discriminatory housing policies, particularly those that disproportionately affect racial minorities, women, and people with disabilities. Recommendations for Landlords If your municipality has implemented a crime-free ordinance that may conflict with federal protections, consider the following steps: 1. Review your lease agreements and policies to identify provisions that may violate federal law, even if required by local ordinance. 2. Consult with a housing attorney familiar with fair housing law and local regulations to understand your specific obligations and risks. 3. Implement individualized assessments rather than blanket policies when evaluating potential tenants with criminal histories. 4. Document all housing decisions with clear, non-discriminatory business justifications. 5. Create explicit exceptions in your policies for domestic violence victims and emergency service calls. 6. Engage with local government by attending city council meetings and advocating for amendments to problematic ordinances. 7. Join or form landlord associations to collectively address concerns with local officials. 8. If necessary, consider seeking a declaratory judgment in court to resolve the conflict between federal and local requirements. 9. Stay informed about new legal developments in this rapidly evolving area of law. Navigating this legal minefield is challenging; however, landlords should prioritize compliance with federal civil rights laws. When local ordinances and federal protections conflict, federal law generally prevails. By taking proactive steps to ensure fair housing practices, landlords can protect themselves from liability while also supporting safe, stable housing for all community members.

Read full story

HUD Publishes 2025 Income Limits

On April 1, 2025, HUD published the 2025 income limits for HUD programs and the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit and Tax-Exempt Bond programs. The limits are effective on April 1, 2025. The limits for the LIHTC and Bond projects are published separately from those for HUD programs. For better understanding, LIHTC and Bond properties operate under the Multifamily Tax Subsidy Project (MTSP) limits. These properties are 'held harmless' from income limit (and therefore rent) reductions. This means that these properties may use the highest income limits for resident qualification and rent calculation since the project has been in service. However, it's important to note that HUD program income limits are not 'held harmless '. HUD publishes the 50% and 60% MTSP limits alongside the Average Income (AI) limits, which are set at 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, and 80%. Projects that began service before 2009 may utilize the HERA Special Income Limits in areas where HUD has published such limits. Projects placed in service after 2008 cannot use the HERA Special Limits. Projects in rural areas not financed by tax-exempt bonds can use the higher MTSP limits or the National Non-Metropolitan Income Limits (NNMIL). It is important to note that for 2025, HUD has made changes to the definitions of geographic areas as determined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The counties or towns within certain metropolitan areas may have changed. Owners and managers should consult the HUD Area Definition Report for a list of their areas and their components. The link to the Area Definition Report can be found on the website provided below. Owners of LIHTC projects may rely on the 2024 income limits for all purposes for 45 days after the effective date of the newly issued limits, which ends on May 16, 2025. The limits for HUD programs may be found at www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html. The limits for LIHTC and Bond programs may be found at www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/mtsp.html.

Read full story

Want news delivered to your inbox?

Subscribe to our news articles to stay up to date.

We care about the protection of your data. Read our Privacy Policy.