OMB/HUD Delays on Fair Housing Regs and Demos Continue.

There are three regulatory fair housing actions still pending at HUD or OMB.

At HUD

A notice of a affirmatively furthering fair demonstration program in the Baltimore MSA was sent to OMB on January 17, 2012. Five months later, OMB cleared the notice on May 16, 2012, but nearly 30 days later HUD has yet to publish the notice in the Federal Register. 

AGENCY: HUD-OH  RIN: 2502-ZA13 
TITLE: Notice of Intent to Conduct Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Demonstration in Baltimore, Maryland, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (FR-5617) 
STAGE: Notice  

RECEIVED DATE: 01/17/2012    
COMPLETED: 05/16/2012  

COMPLETED ACTION: Consistent with Change 
 

At OMB

Two Rules are Pending at OMB, one a FINAL rule and the second a proposed rule. The final disparate impact rule has been at OMB for approaching two months, while the proposed affirmatively furthering fair housing reg has been at OMB for 5 months.

 

AGENCY: HUD-FHEO  RIN: 2529-AA96 
TITLE: Implementation of the Fair Housing Act--Disparate Impact (FR-5508) 
STAGE: Final Rule  

RECEIVED DATE: 04/25/2012  
Note : A meeting this past Monday (June 11) concerning this rule was held with advocates, HUD, and OMB; details about attendees are HERE.

AGENCY: HUD-HUDSEC  RIN: 2501-AD33 
TITLE: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (FR-5173) 
STAGE: Proposed Rule  

RECEIVED DATE: 01/17/2012     

Originally created and posted on the Oregon Housing Blog.

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Notice for Baltimore MSA Demo Clears OMB.

On January 17, 2012 HUD sent two affirmatively furthering regulatory items to the Office of Management and Budget for their review. 

The first item was a Notice for an AI demonstration to be conducted in the Baltimore metro area and yesterday that notice cleared OMB, setting the stage for HUD publication in the Federal Register. 

The second item was a a proposed AI Regulation, and as of this morning this still remains with OMB and has not been cleared. 

(Readers may recall a recent post HERE suggesting that the proposed regulation would significantly change the AI process).

The status of regulations under review by OMB can be checked by agency at the regulatory review website HERE.

 

Originally created and posted on the Oregon Housing Blog. 

HUD Mixed Finance Section 202 and 811 Proposed Rule at OMB for Review.

OMB reg review page for this proposed rule, received from HUD on Oct 27, is HERE.

Originally created and posted on the Oregon Housing Blog.

Updated: OMB Has HUD Proposed Disparate Impact Fair Housing Regulation Under Review, Anyone Know More?

Update: 
Did some digging and discovered 2009 National Fair Housing Alliance document about disparate impact policy and possible reg; see link HERE.
---------
A new HUD proposed HUD regulation is under review by OMB as of June 7th. All that is currently available is listed HERE: 

"Implementation of the Fair Housing Act--Disparate Impact (FR-5508) "

I don't see any reference to this reg in prior semi annual regulatory agendas.  Anyone know any more about this proposed reg? If so , please email or leave comment below.

Originally created and posted on the Oregon Housing Blog.

OMB Information Collection Related to Survey of LIHTC Properties After 15 Year Use Period Expires.

OBM web page for this information collection is HERE.  Includes links to comments received, and other useful background information.(Survey apparently focuses on early LIHTC projects, pre 1990, when only a 15 year use period was required).

Originally created and posted on the Oregon Housing Blog.

OMB Annual Draft Report for Comment on the Costs and Benefits of Government Regulations.

Draft 2011 report for public comment is on the OMB website HERE; earlier reports are listed HERE. Look for publication in the Federal Register tomorrow, with expected comment deadline of May 16, 2011.

2011 report says:

The estimated annual benefits of major Federal regulations reviewed by OMB from October 1, 2000, to September 30, 2010, for which agencies estimated and monetized both benefits and costs, are in the aggregate between $136 billion and $651 billion, while the estimated annual costs are in the aggregate between $44 billion and $62 billion

Page 108 shows that HUD had ONE rule included in the total above, a Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) regulation, with benefits of $2.303 billion and costs of $884 million.

Originally created and posted on the Oregon Housing Blog.

OMB Has PH Capital Fund Proposed Rule for Regulatory Review.

Could be months before they complete review; URL is here:
http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201004&RIN=2577-AC50

Place Based Strategies Getting Renewed Focus in FY 2011 Budget.

One of the big items for focus during the Clinton Administration were placed based strategies. HUD sent waves of HUD managers to training sessions in Portland, Chicago (and other places I can't remember) to help focus attention on placed based strategies.

10+ years later placed based programs are clearly going to be a focus of the new Administration. NLIHC's Memo to Members has a piece this morning HERE that signals that OMB is going to be asking agencies to once again refocus on placed based programs. (The M2M piece includes the link to the OMB guidance, which can be found HERE.

Originally created and posted on the Oregon Housing Blog.

RESPA Rule Advances: OMB Clears HUD Final RESPA Regs.

The HUD RESPA final rule has made it through OMB clearance, and presumably is on its way to publication in the Federal Register by the administration imposed November 20th deadline for publication of final rules with significant economic impact.

OMB cleared the rule on November 7th, according to the summary posted HERE. (The "consistent with change" comment may indicate that OMB made some changes to the rule as proposed by HUD).

Expect More from OMB—Contradictory 5 Year Chronic Homeless Unit Production Goals Appear in Same Document.

After looking over the years at the program evaluations posted on the federal Office of Management and Budget [OMB] Expect More website I have often concluded that it is an ambitious yet frequently flawed attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of government programs.

Take for example OMB’s recently updated evaluation of HUD competitive homeless programs, one of the few programs at HUD that OMB rates as “moderately effective”.

OMB’s detailed evaluation of the HUD program can be found here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/detail/10001234.2005.html#performanceMeasures

Problem #1-OMB States Goal First as 20,000 Chronic Homeless Units and Then As 40,000 Units-Which Is it?

OMB’s Strategic Planning Question 2.1 asks: Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

The OMB evaluation provides this as the answer:

“The overall long-term goal of the Homeless Assistance Grants is to end chronic homelessness and to help homeless families and individuals move to permanent housing and to live as independently as possible. The first part of the goal is measured with the following long-term measure: "Within the next five years (2005 - 2009), HUD will create 40,000 new units of permanent housing for chronically homeless individuals.”

However in the same report, in the Program Performance Measures section, OMB states the outcome goal as: “Within the next five years (2005 - 2009), HUD will create 20,000 new units of permanent housing for chronically homeless individuals.”

My Evaluation: The goal is either 20,000 or 40,000 units over 5 years but it can’t be both.

Problem #2—150,000 Unit Goal—Who is Going to Produce and Track?

If that outright conflict were not enough, consider another strategic planning question, number 2.7 which asks: Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

OMB’s evaluation provides this as the answer:

“HUD's 2006 budget request for Homeless Assistance Grants is tied specifically to accomplishing the long-term goal of ending chronic homelessness. This goal can be accomplished by creating 150,000 permanent supportive housing units. HUD requested nearly $200 million in new funds for 2006 to create approximately 8,000 more units towards this goal. “

My Evaluation: Projection of the cited 8,000 HUD units annually would seem to confirm the 40,000 unit 5 year target. However, since HUD is by far the largest Homeless funder, and if it’s funds are going to produce only 40,000 units, WHO is going to produce, pay for , and track progress on the 110,000 remaining unit goal?