Take Action on TOPA, SPAF, and Proposed HUD Changes

Take Action on TOPA and SPAF

The Boston Globe ran a great article on April 17th - "Mass. housing crisis can’t be solved by new construction alone: The state must also prioritize buying existing affordable housing that is at risk of conversion to market-rate units — arguably the most cost-effective tool the state has." 

We couldn't agree more! This is why we need the legislature to pass the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA) S998/H1544,  allowing cities and towns to give tenants the right to buy their homes - or designate that right to an affordable housing purchaser like a CLT or CDC - when they're up for sale. Tell your legislators to pass TOPA! We also need more than revolving loan funds to rescue affordable housing from speculators at scale - the Small Properties State Acquisition Fund (SPAF) budget amendment #830 - would help nonprofits acquire housing and keep it affordable for the long term. Contact us & come to the CLT lobby day on May 12 to join the fight for TOPA & SPAF.

Take Action on Proposed Changes to HUD that would Impact Vouchers for Mixed-Status Households

The rule proposes sweeping changes to 24 CFR Part 5, Subpart E, which implements Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980. HUD frames the changes as aligning regulations with statutory intent and with Executive Order 14218, "Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders." The core effect is to eliminate the long-standing framework that allowed mixed-status families to remain housed with prorated rent. Give comments here. (There’s a blue comment box that links to a form on the upper left part of the page.)

The rule applies to all Section 214-covered programs, including Public Housing, Housing Choice Vouchers, Project-Based Rental Assistance, and Section 236. It does not apply to standalone LIHTC properties — unless those properties also carry a HUD assistance layer (e.g., a project-based Section 8 contract).

Key Provisions

1. Elimination of the "Do Not Contend" Option: Currently, a household member may elect not to assert eligible immigration status. That person is excluded from the subsidy calculation, rent is prorated, and the arrangement can continue indefinitely. The proposed rule would eliminate this option entirely. All members of assisted households — regardless of age — would be required to declare citizenship or eligible immigration status and consent to verification. Families with undocumented members would face a stark choice: remove that member from the household or lose assistance altogether.

2. Removal of the Age 62+ Exemption: Current rules exempt residents 62 and older from full immigration documentation requirements. The proposed rule would end this exemption, requiring every resident to submit documentation and undergo verification, including providing a Social Security Number.

3. Mandatory SAVE Verification for All Residents: Currently, SAVE verification applies only to noncitizens. Under this proposal, every resident — including those declaring U.S. citizenship — would be verified through DHS's SAVE system using biographic information and a government-issued numeric identifier. If the initial automated query doesn't confirm eligibility, the PHA or owner must proceed to secondary verification with physical documentation.

4. Prorated Assistance Becomes Temporary Only: Prorated rent — which currently can continue indefinitely for mixed-status families — would be limited to the verification period only. Once verification concludes, all household members must have confirmed eligible status or the family loses assistance. The regulatory pathway that allowed long-term prorated arrangements would be permanently closed.

5. Mandatory DHS Reporting: PHAs and owners would be required to report to DHS any household member found to be present in the U.S. in violation of immigration law. This provision has drawn significant concern, as it would effectively make PHAs and housing owners participants in immigration enforcement.

6. Compliance Timelines for Current Residents: Mixed-status families not yet on file: 90 days from the rule's effective date (with a possible 30-day extension). All other residents: at their next annual or interim reexamination PHAs and owners must notify affected residents within 30 days of the final rule's effective date.

Estimated Impact

HUD's own analysis estimates roughly 19,600 existing residents would be directly burdened. However, advocacy organizations project far higher numbers — up to 80,000 individuals losing assistance, including approximately 37,000 U.S. citizen children. Notably, HUD's own Regulatory Impact Analysis acknowledges that roughly 3.8 million U.S. citizen adults lack documentation proving citizenship, and another 17.5 million cannot easily obtain such documents — raising concerns about impacts well beyond mixed-status families.

Potential Impacts on Private Landlords

1. Sudden Loss of Rental Income: Ending subsidies for mixed-status families would leave private owners with a sudden loss of rental income, disrupting their business. For individual landlords who may have only a handful of HCV tenants, even one or two terminations could have a meaningful financial impact.

2. Chilling Effect on HCV Participation: The added burden of requiring all tenants' citizenship status to be verified and the threat of potentially losing tenants over failure to produce sufficient documentation may be enough to deter private owners from continuing to participate in this vital program.  This is a particularly serious concern given the ongoing national effort to expand landlord participation in the voucher program — this rule would work directly against that goal.

3. Mandatory Immigration Reporting Obligations: Under the proposed rule, private owners — not just PHAs — would be required to report to DHS any household member found to be in the U.S. in violation of immigration law. Affordable housing advocates have raised concerns that the proposed rule would require housing owners to inform federal officials about a household member who is in violation of immigration laws, a move that enlists owners into immigration enforcement and away from their mission of providing housing.  For many landlords, this represents a fundamental shift in their role and relationship with tenants.

4. Unit Turnover and Vacancy Costs: HUD's Regulatory Impact Analysis identifies costs for entities such as PHAs and housing owners, spanning the administrative costs of verifying eligible immigration status to the eviction and turnover costs of processing terminations.  For private landlords, finding replacement tenants — particularly in markets where demand for affordable units may not immediately absorb vacancies — could mean carrying costs during extended vacancy periods.

5. Reduced Affordability Supply Without a Corresponding Benefit: The rule will result in less affordable housing being available because there will be a loss in the higher rents that mixed-status families pay, and public housing authorities won't be able to spread the subsidies across more families. This is a somewhat counterintuitive dynamic worth noting in public comments: mixed-status families currently pay more than fully subsidized families due to proration, meaning their participation actually generates relatively higher revenue for private landlords.

There’s a blue comment box that links to a form on the upper left part of the page.