6/29/04 Section 8 Update- Advocates Struggle To Stop Alameda Evictions

The HUD Created Section 8 Disaster Continues

In todays 12pm/1:30pm June 29 Meeting with Non-Profit Housing Organizations and local Public Housing Authority directors in San Francisco, it was confirmed that the audience was mostly filled with bankers and developers concerned about the Section 8 mess, and a sprinkling of attorney's from Legal Aid were among those in the crowd. The panelists discussing the Section 8 cisis were from the San Francisco, Alameda, and Santa Clara Housing Authority's, with 1 director from Berkeley's Housing Authority and 2 directors from Marin County Housing Authority were sitting in the audience. It appears that only one Section 8 renter was in the crowd, and that no solution was forthcoming from the meeting to deal with the HUD created funding crisis that is spreading across the nation.

**********
The Bush administration & HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson are unmoved by the plight of 60,000 Section 8 renters across the nation that may face eviction through no fault of their own. The impact of the April 22 HUD notice that changed the funding formula for the Section 8 program continues to be a disaster for the poorest of the poor.

Click below for the latest from the National Low Income Housing Coalition...

http://www.nlihc.org/mtm/mtm9-25.html#2

***********
April 22 HUD Created Section 8 Disaster

The National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials has estimated that after program reserves are taken into account, agencies will experience shortfalls totaling more than $183 million. NAHRO estimates that this shortfall will cause about 96,000 vouchers to be left unfunded for all or part of the remainder of 2004

NAHRO’s state-by-state estimates are available on the internet at;

http://www.nahro.org/documents/2004/0528HUDImpFY2004S8HAPRenForm.pdf.

***********
Update: June 18, 2004 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

FURTHER ACTION BY HUD NEEDED TO HALT CUTS IN HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES

HUD Policy Is Forcing Many Housing Agencies to Impose Cuts
Even Though Congress Provided Sufficient Funding to Support All Vouchers
By Barbara Sard and Will Fischer

Click below for more...

http://www.cbpp.org/4-26-04hous.htm

***********
Public Housing Residents Fight Back To Save Public Housing

On, Monday June 21, public housing residents of Chicago appeared in Federal Court charging the Chicago Housing Authority with violation of international human rights standards prohibiting forced evistions.

It's the first time that public housing residents have used human rights laws on displacement to oppose mass evictions and forced relocation from public housing units across the nation that have forced thousands into homelessness.

Click below for the full story...

http://www.forward.com/main/article.php?ref=leavitt200406241133

***********
Mother Jones covered the disaster taking place since the HUD April 22 notice to change funding for the Section 8 program took place. Click below for the full story...

Mother Jones/Slashing Section 8

http://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymojo/2004/05/05_520.html

**********
June 29 Update Notice; Alameda Section 8 Disaster

In a call today to Director Michael Pucci's office, he could not be reached and his secretary suggested that there has been no change or update since yesterday in regards to the 134 families that still have vouchers that were terminated.

Calls made to 2 renters with terminated vouchers confirmed that they have not heard anything new from the housing authority, and they are very concerned as the clock ticks toward the end of the month and rent is due in 2 days time.

A call made to the AHA at 510/747-4399 has a recording about the latest on the Section 8 disaster in Alameda, and offers little to anything new in regards to the remaining 134 families at risk of losing their housing.

The Housing Authority of Alameda Notice below only mentions the rescision of the 105 vouchers being terminated, but fails to mention the other 134 families with terminated vouchers due to no fault of their own since June 5, 2004. It's amazing what people try to do with words, and we will not forget that 274 families were put at risk of losing their housing in Alameda and that 134 families are still at risk.

There is still no discussion going on to explain why the June 3, LA Times story quoted Director Michael Pucci as stating that 100 vouchers would be terminated, and by June 5, the figure rose to 274 vouchers being terminated.

* The Alameda Housing Authority, facing a $3.2-million deficit, will cancel the contracts of about 100 families, effective July 1, said Michael Pucci, executive director of the city's housing authority. Click below for full story...

http://www.knowledgeplex.org/news/28209.html

June 29 NOTICE from the Director of the Housing Authority of Alameda

http://www.alamedahsg.org/public_notice.htm 

The Housing Authority of the City of Alameda is pleased to announce that we will be rescinding the terminations of 105 Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) contracts that would have gone into effect on June 30, 2004.  We believe more rescissions will occur prior to July 1.  We are able to rescind these terminations for several reasons.  Some Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher holders have voluntarily relinquished their assistance.  Some of the letters that we have received are touching.  One former voucher holder said, “I would like to take this opportunity to Thank the Alameda Housing Authority for the assistance they have given my children and I over the past several years.  The help that I received allowed me to go back to school, earn a degree, and start a career, enabling me to support my family.  At this time, I feel that it is more important for the Housing Authority to give aid to another needy family.” 

Landlords are doing their part as well.  There was a positive response from approximately 200 landlords at the June 15 meeting to reduce rents to keep tenants in place.  More and more of them are voluntarily lowering their rents to reduce the overall cost of HAP for the Housing Authority.  The response has been very positive; we are receiving requests almost daily from landlords willing to take this step.  The Alameda community is pulling together to meet this challenge.

Other housing authorities throughout the state have also been helping.  The Oakland and Contra Costa County Housing Authorities have advised us that they are willing to absorb (i.e., take over responsibility for HAP payment) voucher holders who have previously ported to their jurisdictions.  That’s 40 vouchers in total and part of the reason we are able to rescind so many terminations. 

The Housing Authority also has been refining its numbers every day as additional information is received.  With every tenant who leaves the program and every landlord who voluntarily lowers their rent, there is more money available to provide rental subsidies for tenants whose housing assistance was terminated.  In addition, the Housing Authority has been updating market rent information for each census tract in the city.  In doing this, contract rents may be reduced on additional units under lease, again freeing up funds to restore assistance for more families in need.

The City of Alameda is doing what it can to help as well.  The City is exploring using funds from other programs that can be used to pay another month of housing assistance for the remaining tenants whose assistance was scheduled to terminate at the end of the month.  More will be known about the availability of these funds by next week.  The Housing Authority is continuing with these efforts and in pursuing additional funding from HUD.

With the help of Alameda’s tenants, landlords, the City of Alameda’s elected officials and employees, and other housing authorities throughout the state, we believe that we may be able to rescind terminations or restore assistance to nearly all tenants by August 1, 2004.

*********** 
ALERT TO SECTION 8 RENTERS!

The following Is the latest to let you see what is happening to save the Section 8 renters of Alameda.

E-Mails & Letters From Advocates In The Struggle To Save The Renters Of Alameda From Losing Their Housing From The Section 8 Shortfalls.

-----Original Message-----
From: Luz Buitrago
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 1:51 PM
To: Luz Buitrago; 'Benjamin Gould'; 'Catherine M. Bishop'; 'Ariella
Hyman'; Raquel Kuronen; 'Mona Breed'; 'Fred Nisen'; 'Bettina
Neuefeind';
'Laura Lane (E-mail)'; 'Dara Schur'; 'Bill Simpich (E-mail)';
'Stephanie Kurteff'; 'Noah Zinner'; 'Kathleen Patricia Reilley'; 'Phillip Morgan';
'Meliah Thomas'; 'Virginia Knowlton (E-mail)'; 'Sharon Jemal (E-mail)';
'Mike Rawson2 (E-mail)'
Cc: 'Michael Froehlich'; 'Shawn Wilson (E-mail)'; 'Rachel Richman
(E-mail)'; Alice Supv BOS Dist 3 Lai-Bitker (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Section 8-up-date of Meeting with City &
Importance: High

Hi Everyone,

Things have moved very quickly. A group of us, Mike Rawson, BALA
folks, Fred Nisen,PAI, Cathy Bishop, and I met with Mike Pucci, City Manger
James Flint, and Deputy City Attorney Teresa Highsmith. This is a very brief
summary of the meeting so that we can start getting the word out to
tenants of good news.

You all know that on Friday, the HA had rescinded about 105 vouchers.
You also know that on Friday they were looking at using HOME funds to pay
one month's subsidy payment to landlords who have contracts affecting the
remaining 134 vouchers. AT our meeting, we confirmed that HA will be
proposing this to City Council at a special meeting that will be held
July1. City Council will have to approve the plan and thus until the
actual meeting one cannot guarantee that they will adopt the plan and that the
funding will be there. But the assessment is that they will.

At the meeting, we requested that HA immediately write a letter to
landlords and letter to tenants. The letter to landlords will give them
direction re what is happening and we hope indicate what they should or should not
do. The letter to tenants will advice them of what is happening, and
because there is no guarantee until the City Council votes on this, will
probably be a little wishy washy re that tenants should not move. HA has agreed to
send these letters to LCFF and BALA so that we can provide them with
comments re context. We will also see if the letters can be translated into key
languages spoken other than English by T. But because of the timing
issues this may not happen.

We also got them to agree to list BALA on the tenant letter so that
tenants know where to go to get help explaining the complicated mess...which in
essence is that the HAP contracts will still be terminated because HOME
canno apparently cannot be used in conjunction with Section 8 Voucher.
However, because landlords will get money they should not be able to
evict tenants for non-payment or HAP termination. Landlords will have to
regulatory agreements with HA. If and when HUD releases funding
tenants will be placed back on Section 8.

Following Needs to Happen:

1. Short-term (immediate) action is to get the use of HOME money
approved, get notices to LL and Tenants. This will buy tenants through August.
So does not resolve the problem, but gives everyone enough time to work on
the next short term goal. City Council should get faxes encouraging them
to take action and thanking them in advance of the JUly 1 meeting. I
assume folks will be at the special meeting to show support for this effort.

2. Short-term second goal: getting HUD to release at least some of the
money from different funding sources. Getting the governor involved
and increasing congressional pressure key. Because there have been efforts
focusing on the broader problem rather than on Alameda, problem, focus
needs to be on help Alameda and other agencies facing crisis right now.
LCFF will follow up to see if Burton was successful in getting Governor
to be involved. Also, Judge Bartaloni was going to use his personal
contacts with Burton to make sure that these efforts highlight Alameda problems.
We also need congressional folks step up pressure. Perhaps faxes or
calls in this regard will help. Pete Stark's office was going to follow on
this.

3. Longer-term (still short-term) focus on getting HUD to change its
use of the formula using for Budgets. Same as above. But if get HUD to
correct miscalculations and to replenish or refund reserves, the crisis could
be controlled. Strategies same as above.

4. Of course there is the litigation angle against HUD, but because of
nature of lit. the political approach is key right now. City agreed
to consider possibility if necessary. And of course, some of us are
interested in pursuing if necessary and makes sense.

Folks who were at the meeting should add anything I missed.

-----Original Message-----
From: Luz Buitrago
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 2:00 PM
To: Luz Buitrago; 'Benjamin Gould'; 'Catherine M. Bishop'; 'Ariella
Hyman'; Raquel Kuronen; 'Mona Breed'; 'Fred Nisen'; 'Bettina
Neuefeind';
'Laura Lane (E-mail)'; 'Dara Schur'; 'Bill Simpich (E-mail)';
'Stephanie
Kurteff'; 'Noah Zinner'; 'Kathleen Patricia Reilley'; 'Phillip Morgan';
'Meliah Thomas'; 'Virginia Knowlton (E-mail)'; 'Sharon Jemal (E-mail)';
Mike Rawson2 (E-mail)
Cc: 'Michael Froehlich'; 'Shawn Wilson (E-mail)'; 'Rachel Richman
(E-mail)'; Luz Buitrago
Subject: RE: Section 8-up-date of Meeting with City &


After I finshed the last E-mail, we heard from James Flynt, city
manager.
This is the deal:

Flynt, City Atty, Mike Pucci can meet with us on Tuesday. He has an
assistant that will be getting dates from Carol and Pucci. Please if
you can keep Tuesday open so that you can joing the meeting. We will let you
know as soon as we know Carol's and Pucci's schedule.

They have scheduled a special City council meeting for July 1 7:30.
This issue will be the first issue on the agenda.

Mayor Johson is in DC with other Mayors. Not sure whether individually
meeting with Jackson.

The below message gives you some other details that are great news.

Luz

-----Original Message-----
From: Luz Buitrago
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 1:43 PM
To: 'Benjamin Gould'; Catherine M. Bishop; Ariella Hyman; Raquel
Kuronen; Mona Breed; Fred Nisen; Bettina Neuefeind; Laura Lane
(E-mail);
Dara Schur; Bill Simpich (E-mail); Stephanie Kurteff; Noah Zinner;
Kathleen Patricia Reilley; Phillip Morgan; Meliah Thomas; Virginia
Knowlton (E-mail); Sharon Jemal (E-mail)
Cc: Michael Froehlich; Shawn Wilson (E-mail); Rachel Richman (E-mail)
Subject: Some important Up-dates.


Hi Everyone,

It seems that some of our efforts are starting to pay off. We will be
sending via separate E-mail the letters and memos that went to the City
and Congressional folks.

I spoke to Judge Bartalini, Chair of the HA, and to Mike Puccii
(separate calls). They are beginning to find the funding to rescind notices and
as off today have started to rescind 15 notices. They have found $ by
brokering a deal with Martinez HA regarding Section 8 vouchers that
Alameda was paying for. In addition, they did seek HOME funding--about
$130--think that they weill get it. This will cover more vouchers. If HA gets,
Pucci thinks will be able to rescind all other terminations (not clear
includes overleased since Pucci was running out of the office when we spoke).
The HOME funds will cover one months payment, but because HOME cannot be
used in conjunction with Section 8, the terminations themselves will not be
rescinded, but the LL's would be paid, if thinks worked out by August,
those voucher holders would be reinstated. Details re how this will work not
clear.

The Deputy City Atty is doing a research memo on potential use of
Redev. funds. Problem is that $$ had already been set aside for certain
projects.

I told Pucci that all of this was great, but that they should still
consider rescinding all vouchers even if they do not find funding. One Ra.
being that some tenants at risk due to miscalculations. He did not say I was
crazy, and did not say out of the question, but of course this would be
tough for th em to do.

They will have a better sense next week about all of this.

He talked to the new HCD Director--Lucetta Dunn (sp.) they said
governor aware of problem HUD is creating. Apparently, Gov. has DC office and
they have been working on this...of course not focusing on Alameda.

We still need to push for recission of all vouchers, even if short of
funds. And of course if all of this happens strategize re going against HUD.

BALA...you may want to check in with HA to see if your clients are
among those folks who will receive rescission notices. Pucci said he would
be glad to look at this next week.

*********
June 24, 2004 

VIA FACSIMILE

AT (510) 523-1952 

Judge Bartaloni  

Re:  Meeting with Alameda City Officials  

Dear Judge Bartaloni: 

Thank you for taking the time to meet with advocates from the Law Center for Families (“LCFF”) and Bay Area Legal Aid (“BayLegal”) on June 21, 2004 regarding the Section 8 funding crisis in Alameda. LCFF and BayLegal have been working closely with other housing advocates from the National Housing Law Project and the Public Interest Law Project on developing strategies to address this dire problem. As we discussed, we would like to meet with the city officials to discuss action that they can take and how we can work collaboratively to remedy this crisis (advocates have already communicated with congressional, state and local representatives). Therefore, we greatly appreciate your offer to facilitate such a meeting. Our Director, Luz Buitrago, received your message indicating that the City Manager, James Flint, would put a meeting on the city’s calendar as soon as he receives the proposed Agenda. The proposed Agenda for the meeting is attached and we will be sending a copy of this letter and the Agenda to Mr. Flint as well. As the Section 8 terminations are scheduled to take effect July 1, 2004, we would like to meet as soon as possible.  

In order that the meeting be as productive as possible, we would like to request that Mayor Johnson, the members of the City Council (or at least some members), Michael Pucci or James Flint, and City Attorney, Carol Korade be present. We also recommend that the Mayor and other officials consider taking some of the suggested action mentioned in the Agenda even before we meet, as some suggestions require coordination. For example, if possible, Mayor Johnson should take steps to schedule a personal meeting with Secretary Jackson as soon as possible.

Thank you so much for your assistance and we look forward to meeting with everyone.  

Sincerely, 

Raquel M. Kuronen

Encl.

cc: City Manager, James Flint

*********
June 25, 2004 

URGENT 

Dear Senators Feinstein and Boxer, and Congresspersons Pelosi, Lee and Stark: 

Delivered by Facsimile: 202-228-3954; 415-956-6701; 510-763-6538; 202-225-9817; 510-494-5852; 202-226-3805; 202-225-8259, 415.861.1670 

The undersigned are writing on behalf of the 2391 Section 8 voucher tenants— many of whom are people with disabilities, and seniors, and all of whom are very low-income---in the City of Alameda who are facing the imminent loss of their homes due to the improper termination of their vouchers.  The terminations are scheduled for July 1, 2004---barely one week from now.  They are the direct result of HUD's misinterpretation of HUD appropriations acts.  The Alameda Housing Authority (AHA) is one the numerous housing authorities throughout the country that has or will be affected by HUD’s illegal and insupportable interpretation and application of the laws.

The Law Center For Families, The Public Interest Law Project provide legal assistance to low-income residents of Alameda County and are working with effected tenants who will experience tremendous hardships--even homelessness--should this dire problem not be immediately corrected.  The National Housing Law Project assists and supports the efforts of these organizations. Sentinel Fair Housing provides assistance with fair housing issues. Bill Simpich is a civil rights attorney, also working with effected tenants. Protection & Advocacy, Inc. (PAI) provides legal assistance to and advocates with and on behalf of people with disabilities. PAI is representing tenants with disabilities who face imminent homelessness. 

There are numerous efforts that have been mounted nationally to address this voucher funding crisis. In Massachusetts concerted advocacy efforts placed pressure on HUD to release funds to address the short term funding issues. In that case, the federal representatives, local advocates and Governor Romney aggressively advocated on behalf of the voucher holders and successfully obtained HUD action. 

We are aware that you have taken steps to address this problem that is having an impact on Section 8 recipients and applicants throughout California. We thank each one of you for taking these steps, but seek your additional assistance on behalf of the affected City of Alameda families. While the Alameda Housing Authority is a small housing authority, 14% of their voucher families are facing eviction. Variations of these funding problems will no doubt confront other housing authorities throughout the state. Thus, it is extremely important that you act now on behalf of the Alameda City Section 8 families so as to prevent the spread of this or similar problems.

The following is a summary of the relevant facts affecting the City of Alameda Housing Authority that we hope is helpful to you. These are the facts as we currently understand them (the picture changes on a day-to-day basis depending on events that occur due to efforts that the housing authority has taken—e.g., requesting that landlords voluntarily agree to reductions): 

The Housing Authority sent out termination notices to 239 Section 8 voucher recipients that are to take effect on July 1, 2004. The Housing Authority is authorized for 1625 vouchers. As of July 1, due to the terminations, it will have 1430 vouchers in the program, far less than the authorized level. The apparent breakdown of terminated vouchers is as follows: 95 due to HUD’s use of its new allocation formula, 100 due to erroneous submission of information that the housing authority provided for May/June/and July 2003 figures, and 44 due to overleasing.  

There is a potential achievable solution to each of these problems. But the housing authority has little flexibility as HUD has failed since December 2002 to fund the housing authority’s reserves.

What is needed immediately is that HUD: 

1. Fund the housing authority’s reserves and approve requests to allow full use of the reserves to address the issues related to the 195 families threatened with termination due to funding formula determinations.
2. Immediately approve the housing authority’s request for a higher inflation factor; and
3. Immediately act on the housing authority’s request for correction of the May/June/July 2003 figures.

We request that you schedule a California congressional delegation meeting with Secretary Jackson to urge HUD to take these actions immediately. In addition, we urge you to raise this issue with Governor Schwarzenegger on behalf of the voucher tenants of the City of Alameda and other voucher holders and applicants in California who may also be seriously impacted by HUD’s actions with respect to the funding of housing authorities in Fiscal Year 2004.  

Finally, we would like to schedule a call with your appropriate staff no later than early next week to discuss this urgent crisis in affordable housing. We have already discussed this matter with Sean McCluikie from Congress Member Stark’s office. 

We look forward to working with you on this matter. Please contact me at 510.451.9261 Ext. 208 or Raquel Kuronen at the same number, extension 204 if you have questions about our recommendations. And, thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. 

Sincerely,
 

Luz Buitrago 

Law Center For Families 


Mike Rawson   

Public Interest Law Project 


Cathy Bishop

National Housing Law Project 


Mona Breed

Sentinel Fair Housing 


Bill Simpich

Civil Rights Attorney  


Fred Nisen

Protection & Advocacy, Inc.


1 The number of affected persons is of course much higher as some voucher holders have families that in some cases are large.