Topic: Section 8 required?

Beginning next week, Redmond landlords will no longer be able to refuse rental to tenants because they use a Section 8 housing voucher to help pay rent.

WOW! :ohmy:

This topic has been going around in my state for quite a while. I get quite a few calls from prospects seeking a community that accepts section 8. While I agree that we should not discriminate on the source of legal income, I have a problem with being required to accept section 8, because it raises costs that we aren't able to recoup through the program.

A few years ago I managed a property that accepted section 8 vouchers but was mostly conventional market rate. Section 8 decided we could not charge market rate for the residents using vouchers. To me, this is discrimination against the neighbors who do not qualify for vouchers.

In my neighborhood, there are very few communities that accept section 8. I am not convinced that it's best to lump all voucher recipients into the same neighborhoods.

Additionally, section 8 requires detailed inspections that we must hold a unit vacant for and provide staff for.

What do you think?

kirkland.patch.com/articles/city-council...using-discrimination

You are correct that not accepting applicants with HCV's in place is discrimination on income source. If the housing authority says you cannot charge these applicants your current market rent and their figure is significantly lower; you can appeal their decision and show them your most recent market survey; and ask to see theirs. If yours is more current than theirs; most housing authorities will see your side and agree.


I have no problem accepting HCV recipients as long as they meet all my normal standards for credit/criminal/total income (in this case count the HCV's value). Make friends with the person at the housing authority and you will get your rents and your units inspected quicker. Have the housing authority provide you with a guideline of what they look for when inspecting the units and make sure all your turns exceed what they look for.

Johnny,

You are the man!That is spot on to what my experience has shown as well!

Hi Rose,

I, too, have rented to housing choice voucher (HCV) recipients; however, my experience has been quite different. Our Public Housing Agency (PHA) knew that we would charge full market rent. They never expected anything lower, nor did they expect a concession, if applicable. Nowhere in the HCV program does it state that a property must reduce its market rent to satisfy voucher recipients or the PHA. The HCV program actually state that a metro area may INCREASE fair market rent (FMR) by up to "20 percent for a portion of an FMR area. This provision allows HUD to respond to situations where an areawide 40th percentile FMR does not provide the desired range of choice among units or neighborhoods." (www.huduser.org/periodicals/ushmc/winter98/summary-2.html)

I, too, agree with Johnny. It has been my experience with PHAs that they will work with you on increasing timely inspections and slow payments, if this becomes a problem.

Lastly, you are absolutely correct about your assumption that it is not best for all voucher recipients to live in one property/neighborhood. One of the goals of HCV was to provide mobility for recipients to find housing in better neighborhoods closer to employment, schools, services, transportation, etc. Housing that typically accepts vouchers, without any coercion or a mandated law, is not usually located near employment centers, hospitals, schools, mass transit, grocery stores, etc. This housing then becomes an area of concentrated poverty with all sorts of social ills, i.e. crime, school drop-outs/truancy, unemployment, illiteracy, drug and alcohol abuse, poor health care, etc. Concentrated poverty completely negates the purpose of the HCV. There is a great article about a study published in The American Journal of Public Health that links how many people Poverty actually kills. www.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/health/05social.html

So, yes, I believe Source of Income legislation is necessary; however, I also stand strong that properties must assert their rights and forge positive relationships with their PHAs. Please come back and let us know how it is going!

I agree with what everyone has said so far. My community is a mix of Sect. 8, Sect. 42, and market rates. You have to get to know the people at the local housing authority, we take them donuts every few months :) This gets me referrals as well as makes things run more smoothly for us. My county housing authority is great, it's when I have to deal with the people from our neighboring city that I have an issue. There is so much turnover we never deal with the same people, which is bad enough, but my real problem is their inspections. One of my residents inspections was failed because there was a chip of paint the size of my pinky nail missing from the residents door. Now I have been in the communities that housing authority manages and I can assure you they are not being held to the same standards as we are!
Overall I would say my experiences have been great. We did have a year where the neighboring city did not allow for rent increase. Fortunately I had only one resident receiving HCV from that locality and we worked with her. Otherwise I have always gotten full rent and no issues getting increases. If they tell you your rent is too high, then the prospect will have to move elsewhere, as Kimberly said, there is nothing requiring you meet their rent guidelines.

As far as the inspections go, I would make sure I had a copy of their guidelines to share with my maintenance man to make sure that all turns exceed that standard at a MINIMUM. If you deal with more than one housing authority, make sure you have the guidelines for each. Do NOT worry about other properties and whether or not they meet your standard (or theirs); you do not have the time nor the ability to control what is outside your walls. As long as you meet the standards set, you should have nothing to worry about.

When the housing authority sends notice of annual inspection for a unit currently being occupied by a HVC recipient; it is important that you schedule a time with the resident to send in your maintenance guy to make sure that these standards are upheld and any needed repairs are completed before the scheduled inspection. I would do this no more than a week prior to the inspection.

Once the housing authority people see how you run your house; you will be in a good position with them for future inspections and referrals; unless you run your house like a slumlord....

Interesting situation.
If I'm not mistaken you still have the right to set income guidelines. You can still run a credit report and make decisions on the same basis. As a section 8 landlord now for 7 years, having 5 of my single family homes and a 2 family all in the "program" - I love it and hate it at the same time. With 5 units in the program - maybe I'm lucky or accepted "good" tenants. I had one just now I began to evict and seh is packing up on her own. But I saw it coming. First the rent was late, then the ex husbands death meant she got his SSI - so that "income" reduced the rent paid directly to her. Once more money went directly to her - forget it. she had it spent before rent was due. While I would represent myself in most cases of eviction, in a section 8 tenant, I would go to an experienced LT lawyer. While the program may help and does help - there is little motivation for someone to come off the program. Instead, they wind up i en endless loop of if I work more, that means that less I get in benefits.... users and abusers.

Most of the time a HCV recipient is held to a higher standard by the housing authority and understand that they risk losing their assistance if there are any issues that you may have. As long as the resident/applicant meets the criteria of the housing authority AND yours as well; you do not usually have problems that put their housing and/or assistance at risk. It is important to establish with the resident that you are in regular contact with the housing authority and you do not want to report them for anything that would put their assistance at risk.

My understanding is that once a housing terminates a HCV for cause, they will not be eligible to receive another HCV in the future.

I do not find that Housing Authorities, which are locally managed, hold any Housing Choice Voucher recipient to a "higher standard" than any other rental assistance program holds its waiting list applicants. In my experience, I would have to say many HAs pass the buck and will tell a landlord it is their responsibility to fully vet an applicant by performing background checks and credit checks on their applicants. I find myself having to explain how the program works to many potential residents who come in seeking an apartment through the HCV program. I find, at least in one area in Indiana, workers are overworked and have very little time to explain particulars to those applying for places on Waiting Lists.

Landlords and management companies must understand their rights under the program, and like any business transaction, must consider all the facts regarding annual inspections and fair market rents. It can be very disheartening to an Applicant to come to your apartment community and find that your 3 bedroom rents a full $80 more than others. However, it is your responsibility as a Manager or company exec to set the rents as you would for every person who walks in the door. In this day of revenue management, this might be difficult for some apartment hunters to understand.

It's not so much a higher standard; but I have seen people actually LOSE their HCV when site management reports that the recipient is having problems with nonpayment, with housekeeping, or some other clause or addendum to the lease. I had one that the unit passed, but the housekeeping did not at the time of the annual inspection, so they were given a notice that they would be reinspected specifically for housekeeping issues in 30 days and if the problems were still in place, the assistance would be terminated.

This is even more true for project based section 8 properties from what I understand.

BEWARE of Sect 8 and DSS, they are Gov't Agencies. Nothing but headaches here in NY. Everything that comes out of their mouths is a lie and they are slower than snails uphill, unless of course you owe them money. They make, break and change the rules to fit their situation, and no one, including Gov't Officials does anything about it. If you are a Landlord in NY, you are automatically Wrong and Guilty in or out of Court. So the answer for me, and many other NY Landlord's I know, is CASH. No more Gov't programs. I'm not saying no more headaches, but a lot fewer of them. I could tell you stories that would make your head spin. Some of them are so bizare that you would not even believe me! So the new motto is: CASH ONLY!!! Landlord's have the POWER to change these archaic laws if we only unite and take on these Gov't run programs together. But as we all know, and especially here in NY, we don't have the time, money or resources to do it. So here we sit blogging about it.
finest

I am in the Sacramento area and the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency (SHRA) has been nothing but helpful to me at my last 2 properties. I have been able to form relationships with them that have produced positive results for all concerned in most cases.

IMHO; you need to find a way to work WITH the system; and those that represent it.... their workload is probably much larger than yours, it's no wonder that they may not like you very much.....

It's been a few years since I managed a property that accepts vouchers, but I remember that the few residents I had on the program so grateful for their housing that they were my best tenants.

My issue was with the agency managing the program. It's true that they are very busy, which is why it would take 2-4 weeks to get on the schedule for an inspection. Since every day that the unit is vacant is lost income, this affected my budget. The program also requires 12 month leases, which means section 8 residents are not held to the same requirements of other residents who have to sign a new contract every 6 months. I was shocked when they sent me back a letter after a tenants first year was up telling me that the rent could not be raised, and that we could not charge for utilities that all other residents are required to pay.

Since our community was well kept, there were never any maintenance issues that held someone back from moving in immediately after the inspection, but getting the housing authority to approve the paperwork after the inspection would sometimes make it necessary to postpone a move in even further.

If the housing authority allows us to rent apartment comparably, I'm all in favor of it. But my experience proved that section 8 residents must be given special treatment.

@ Rose:

I understand that HCV recipients cannot sign a lease that is less than 12 months in length. That's why I did not do leases for less than 12 months PERIOD.

I do not understand how the housing authority would not allow you to raise the rent and not give you the opportunity to demonstrate that your market survey showed that the raise was justified and fair based on market conditions. I can see the housing authority raising red flags when you increased rents by 50%; when at most it should only be 10%. Ask to see where they got their information from and show them your market survey. This should be current within the last 15 days. In my experience, when they see your numbers are based in reality and are current, you will get what you want.

As far as waiting for an inspection; that would probably not happen if you were to be friendly with the inspector that is responsible for your area and can call him and tell him you have an approved applicant that needs to move in right away and you have a unit ready to inspect. I have never not been able to do this and get an inspection within a couple of days. The better your inspector knows you, your property, and your standards; the more likely he will go ahead and green light the inspection without coming by. You need to be on those kind of terms with any inspector or case manager you come in contact with. It is not a bad idea to be friendly with their supervisor as well. If you have a number of vacancies, hold an open house and invite them to bring a client or 2.

So I just opened two different inspection results this afternoon. One from my local agency and one from the neighboring city that I always have issues with. My local agency-PASS, the city-Fail! The city agency failed me because my elevators have plates that say "maintenace certificate located in building office". I spoke to the inspector before he left and he NEVER asked me for the certificates!!!! Code requires the certificates to be available not that they be posted. I only need to fax the info, but the point is he could have saved everyone time by simply asking.

Also I agree with Rose, my Sect. 8 residents are so happy to be here. I would challenge anyone to walk my apartments and try to tell, by the way the homes are kept, which person is paying $80 per month and which is paying $1,300.

My elevator has a display window for the permit and I have not had this as an issue. Your elevator maintenance company should be able to install one for you. Just make sure you keep the original permit in the office and display a copy. When you know your inspection is coming due; you need to document that you have contacted the authority to ask for the inspection. The authority for my area was so behind; mine was overdue for 3 months. I had a HCV denial overturned because I was able to document my attempts to contact them; who I spoke with, when, and what I was told.

I had the permit displays before, but kids kept ripping them down :(

Mine used specialty screws that were very long and had a special security type head. I had received my new permit; but needed to wait to put it up until my elevator company came out for regular maintenance as I did not have the right kind of screwdriver to do so myself.

Either to get some good information on current Section 8, or just simply to be well entertained, I recommend the following:

The Section 8 Bible, by Michael Mclean. How to succeed in the Section 8 Industry. (Vol I and II). Amazon. (Caution on language). (More duplex and single family than multifamily).

Various YouTube videos, google on YouTube.


US Government Subsidized Housing (google)

I would like to know if anyone out there knows how or where I can get online training for project based section 8 housing. I know how to work with housing choice vouchers, and I am tax credit certified; but I have not been exposed to project based section 8 at any of the properties I have worked at.

Any ideas would be welcome. I do prefer online training as I control the pace and schedule; and can apply the learning immediately. I am also seeking certification as both Site Compliance Specialist and Occupancy Specialist.

I just did a web search for answers to the question: Is income source protected by fair housing?

I found the following link:

www.nmhc.org/Content/ContentList.cfm?NavID=599

How I read it is that Housing Choice (Section 8) Vouchers are a source of income and to deny housing on that basis alone in many states does violate fair housing. I understand that there is legislation pending at the Federal level to amend the Fair Housing act to include this clause.

So, if you are in a state that includes this currently and do not accept HCV recipients, you need to revisit this and change your policies. If you are not in a state that requires it; I would get on the bandwagon now and revisit the policy anyway in anticipation of the potential change. My experience has been that the properties that do not participate in the program do not do so because they simply do not know how to work with the voucher program. This is easily resolved by contacting your housing authority and request a training session for at least one person at each property.

Totally not true, Johnny, that many properties do not participate in the Housing Choice Voucher program because no one knows how to work with the voucher program. Many properties choose not to participate because of all the paperwork required, all the extra inspections you have to do for those residents with a voucher, which translates to extra expenses and because there is still a stigma attached to the rent-based-on-income program. There are plenty of renters out there who will not come and tour a community that accepts Vouchers.

I only managed a property that accepted vouchers for a short time, but it was a frustrating experience. Until the problems with HUD here are fixed, I hope my owner will continue to refuse it. The vacancy loss alone would destroy my budget.

I agree, source of income should not be discriminated against; however, section 8 recipients are not a protected class in my state so it is legal to refuse to rent to them and many owners (including mine) do. As a site manager, it is not within my power to go against this policy.

I completely understand why owners are reluctant to join the program. It takes so long to get an inspection scheduled (2-4 weeks) that too much rental income is lost that can never be regained. Here in Oregon, HUD decides their own market rate and refuses to allow increases. They refuse to allow owners to charge for utility usage that all other renters have to pay. It's also illegal try to get your inspection moved up ahead of all the others that are waiting their turn. Property owners who try to do so are kicked off the program.

Just throwing this in. My wife and I ran a 72 unit complex for a time in between that complex getting new managers. The property accepted Section 8 HUD. I talked at length with several of the tenants who used the Section 8. The administration of the Section 8 program was by the County Housing Board. Those inspectors who visited me while I was running the property were fairly easy to deal with. Just a few little things like door seals, caulking in windows, a dripping faucet, all easy fixes. Nitpicky, but easy to fix.
The horror stories came from the tenants themselves. Seems they are herded into a room and led through their reapplications like prisoners. I was told they were threatened, and browbeaten by rather abusive and insensitive employees. I talked with some older ladies, as well as some younger families. I got the same story, usually.
I know that patience with folks can run short, especially with older people who cannot easily navigate the flood of paper they are run through. These elderly people are the very ones I am a standard bearer and protector of. I deal a lot with people living on SSI or Social Security only. I deal with tenants who are late 80s to early 90's and some of which have no family to help them.
Being talked "down to" by some overworked impatient county office clerk is not something these people need in the finality of their lives. Let's assist these folks in using their vouchers. Some of them walk thru humiliation to get them!
Sorry for the rant.

That's a very good point Mindy. I am certain that my hands-off owner is not at all familiar with any voucher programs.

I know that my experience with many properties that choose not to participate in the program if they can avoid it due to the program requirements is limited. But the ones I have been connected with that do not have teams that do not know how to work with the program are less likely to accept a HCV recipient simply because they do not know how to work with it. The properties I HAVE been at that DO participate, have not had a problem getting a timely inspection, or an annual rent increase as long as it is submitted to the housing authority with documentation supporting the increase in a timely manner (usually no less than 60 days prior). It is not hard to get what you want, while delivering what the housing authority and HCV recipient need; as long as you know the system, how to work it, and who to talk to. I have often needed to call an inspector directly to schedule an inspection and if the relationship with that inspector is strong; it won't be a problem to get a quick inspection. When I have had inspections; I have had the maintenance manager present so he knows what is being looked for. Eventually, he will get to the point that there are no findings and the inspector will get to the point where he knows it and is willing to green light it based on the quality of prior work.

Herb, I absolutely understand what you are saying. Those who need affordable housing deal with many aspects of an overworked, antiquated and humiliating system. My first forray into property management was in Section 8; I am certified in this area as well. The very people that benefit from the Section 8 HCV and project based assistance programs many times find it an impossible system of bureaucratic nonsense. These applicants do not understand they have to apply to be on a waiting list, a list that opens perhaps only once or twice a year, depending upon the program and it may take years to actually get to the top of the list. These include our senior citizens on fixed incomes, single parents who are in this position for many reasons, and victims of the recession. Don't get me started on those who are the third and fourth generation participants who, in my experience know every loop hole out there and who could work and GET OFF THE PROGRAM. I don't know anyone who has experienced an immaculate conception so these boyfriends who live in these subsidized units without being on a lease should be BANNED for life from public assistance programs, as should their baby mommas.

HUD should streamline the process of recertification, which they are beginning to address with some pilot programs. Once your residents have navigated the system successfully, they should be able to handle the recert process fairly easily as its income verification process rarely changes for seniors, especially those on fixed incomes. The workers who handle the recerts are oftentimes NOT TRAINED in procedures, compliance, or customer service. That should also change.

As for property management companies and owners choosing not to participate, again, it should be their choice to not be compelled to join the rank and file of government mandates.

I find it interesting that one manager, Rose, has strict regaulations regarding setting inspections and another, Johnny, can wheel and deal to get preferential treatment. I admit, in Indiana, I never have problems either bacause I can navigate the "system" pretty well myself. The rules should be the same for everyone though. The screening process should also be the same for every state and rules should be enforced as well, but we know they aren't. This is why it is not a difficult decision for Owners to choose not to participate, in my opinion.

@Mindy: It is not so much 'wheeling and dealing' with the housing authority, as it is me realizing that these inspectors and caseworkers are overworked as well and respecting that. With regards to inspections; respect their time and be friendly with them, offer them a bottle water or soda while at your property, make sure the maintenance manager is with the inspector so that he can develop an understanding of what the inspector is looking for and be able to correct any findings on the spot.

With regards to rent increases; send a copy of your most recent market survey WITH the notice of rent increase. Make sure your rent increase for an existing resident is reasonable (i.e. say your resident is currently at $900, but the market can support $1100 for a new resident. Do not raise the resident's rent to market; raise the rent to a midway of $1000). As long as your rent increase is supported by more recent research than theirs (which the case is more often than not that their market information is not as recent as yours), they will see you are not 'pulling numbers out of your *(*(* and saying it sounds good'.

I interviewed for a position yesterday and she told me about a situation with a HCV recipient that had an assistance animal (exempted from property pet restrictions) and also had a medical marijuana card on file. Since the HCV is a federal program; the resident's assistance was terminated as the federal government has not signed off on the use of medical marijuana; generating a great deal of confusion between the states and the federal government.

All I am saying is that the denial of residency on the basis of being an HCV recipient either already is a fair housing issue in your state on the basis of the fact that the HCV is a source of income; or it may be soon. It is simply best to learn the system and deal with it in the best possible manner you can.

Hello Everyone,

I see this all the time in our industry, when individuals or even corporations think negatively of section 8 because of the reputations of having bad resident profile. However, section 8 is truly not any different than any other housing program or even special pricing leads. I am a product of a subsidize housing (project base and voucher). My mother hit really bad times when my father walked away from us, and was forced to apply to a project based housing community in Brooklyn NY, from there, she received a portable voucher transferred to Florida, where she came to find a new start and get back in her feet. She quickly got a job, and soon we were out of subsidized housing and living at our very own townhome. As you can see, my mother was one of the people that actually used the program for what it was designed for, a stepping stone to get back on track in life. Just like my mother, there are many other people using the program for what is designed for, but it is our job to screen our applicants (section8 or not) to ensure we capture those good residents.

For example, if your community is on a lease-up, and are offering the world in specials (as many communities do), you will attract what I call transitional tenants. These tenants move from community to community, special after special, and only are detected by proper screening. Same for communities with other Housing Programs, and yes, it is well known that section 8 voucher has a lot of tenants that abuse the system, but do you know that you hold their availability? If a tenant doesn’t comply with your rules and regulations, you can actually complain to the Housing Authority holding the voucher and that tenant can lose their voucher. Learn the rules and enforce your policy. Conduct good screening and you will see that section 8 has good tenants, and you will have a good experience.

Sincerely,
Pedro

@Pedro: That's exactly what affordable housing / rent subsidies are for; to give people in a tight situation some temporary assistance to get back on track. The problem that many people have on our side of the issue is the red tape that goes with complying with the program.

Another issue is that the program is flawed in many areas in that it tends to not motivate those receiving the benefits to get off the system and people simply choose to do what they need to in order to stay on the program as long as possible. In affordable properties; the residents are required to undergo an annual income recertification and if there is an increase to such a point as they exceed the property's maximum income level; they are no longer qualified to live there. Good job; the property met it's goal, the resident needs to move as they have too much income. The residents understand this and choose NOT to pursue opportunities that can improve their lives. I have not seen an increase in income in any of my annual recertifications that put residents in this situation. There is no motivation.

I do not know if there are any housing authorities that have put similar measures in place to motivate people to do things that allow them to no longer need the assistance.

It is much like the continuous loop that people on welfare seem to be on; and that is what is most concerning to a lot of people like me. I can understand disability and social security not being part of the problem and that many residents of affordable/project based section 8 properties are on income that is fixed based on that. I also understand that due to the economy, many people are either unemployed/underemployed. It is the latter group that I am concerned with that seem to fall into this loop more often.

Ok, I am off my soapbox.

Every poster has had his or her taste of subsidized housing in one form or another.
The good, the bad, the ugly. Like for instance happened the other day: Tenant charges in and asks in a loud voice "Why did my rent go up to $78.00???? Rent? $78.00? That ain't the rent honey! That's your personal TC (Tenant Contribution) "to the rent" on your unit. You ain't paying squat for rent!
Or, "How much do your apartments rent for"? Answer: 30% of AGMI (Adjusted Gross Monthly Income). "Well, how much is that? It goes on forever.

Now to my point: 2 in 10 (in my experience) actually understand how the rental assistance works. No blame cast here as it being government, it is so simple it is totally non-understandable unless you work and study the regs. Also do you know there are cases of what is called a "zero income tenant"? In some cases, the tenant actually gets a check for living in the unit. The "utility allowance". Since 30% of nothing is nothing, and the tenant is given a utility allowance, I have seen the tenant receive a check for $65.00 a month (utility) and pay zilch for the unit. Things change daily so food stamps, TEA, other things may or may not count as income tomorrow.

The best part of subsidized housing is the award of an IRS 8823 from county housing for a missing switch plate cover, or a missing smoke detector battery that the tenant stole from you for their CD player.
Section 8, ain't it great????

Yes, I have had zero rent residents (I even joked with one when I said if the Sacramento Kings won the game that week; I would pay his rent) at the project I did the entire initial lease up for; however that property was an example of a new concept and was operating as 'Permanent Supportive Housing', basically creating the concept as it went. Many of the policies and protocols that they are using (and have been replicated elsewhere) were created based on what I experienced with my 'boots on the ground'. In order to qualify for housing; the applicants had to prove 3 things:

1) Very low fixed income from any verifiable source (no household exceeded $15k in income per year).
2) Problems with homelessness (these applicants were coming literally from shelters and local homeless camps)
3) Disability (we did not need to know the specifics of the disability beyond what we would need to know for ADA modifications, but it could be a physical or a mental disability; and an addiction issue was also accepted).

The hopes for the program is that after a short time at the property; the social service programs that we were connected with gave these people the tools that they would use to put them in positions where they did not need the program to continue.

I have a conventional market rate property but I get occasional complaints at lease renewal, that rent should not be increased to market because the resident are on a fixed or low income.

I try to explain to them that our rent is not based on income and always offer to refer them to an income based property, but so far, every single one has refused the referral.

I can understand that complaint, but never have raised renewals to current market rent; I have met renewals at 50% of the increase between the current resident rent and the market rent for new residents. I have also offered a resident a 1 month late fee waiver; allowing them to be late one time during the term of their lease without incurring a late fee. The money lost due to not being at the current market for the unit is less than what it would cost to make a vacant unit ready and occupy it with a new resident. It is easier to keep a current resident happy than to find a new one.

With affordable or subsidized properties; it is more difficult to not operate a revolvoing door if you have residents that are motivated to not need the assistance and can make life changes to keep their needs to a minimum. If a resident has to move out of an affordable/subisidized property based on the fact that there was an increase in income to such a point that the resident is no longer qualified; pat yourself on the back, you have done your job and can move on to the next.

If you are a conventional property and residents leave, you need to understand why they are leaving and determine if you need to make any changes. What I am saying is that there are 2 main categories that residents give when they are planning to move out. They are:

Lifestyle changes; these are often not within your ability to control, they can include a change in household composition, a change (loss or gain) in income level, purchase of a home, or change in employment status/location. A lot of times, there may be more than one reason and none of these are within your control.

Property/management issues: these are often within your control as these are all customer service related; are you and your staff responsive to maintenance requests? Are you providing your residents the kind of living environment that the residents are looking for? Are there any policies that need to be reviewed/changed? Is there a new amenity that residents are asking for that can be reasonably done?

Conventional properties should be less of a revolving door than affordable properties; unless there is something specific about the affordable property that the demographic needs to have.

I too am in Washington state, I am so sorry to hear you will be forced to take housing authority. I am in Tacoma and we did a huge clean up on my property about 8 years ago. The first thing we did was get rid of everyone that had issues (most of them were on Housing authority, we also stopped accepting all new applicants on housing authority. We had the place cleaned up in no time. Our issues, delinquency and crime rate have maintained at one of the lowest in Tacoma for 6 years running. I cringe at the thought of having to take Tacoma Housing Authority. They are way to tenant friendly, Every move out I have ever had for THA, the unit has left owing money and THA has done nothing to help us recoup it, nor have they assisted us in lease violation compliance.

Best of Luck

Perhaps you could make it company policy that that criminal history be added with credit history as part of the qualifications to become a resident in your apartment community. Or criminal history as the only qualification. Many folks who rely on the government have abused their privileges as citizens and that is a indication on how they will behave in the future.

I was led to beleive that criminal history was part of the equation for someone who is looking for housing assistance.

If it's not; and applicants with criminal records are not in a protected class (I read somewhere that some states have included this) under fair housing, YOU should already be including credit history and criminal records in YOUR criteria.

Most of the troubles don't necessarily come from the tenant as much as from the baggage that visits them. Case in point:
Last week, I was helping out at one of our units that is facing an audit soon. I set up and took my spray painting equipment to help turn around three of their vacancies. I was in a unit, and painting, when the manager, Michael, comes by with a coffee for me, and to see how it was going. I stepped to the front porch to visit a few minutes with him. A guy next door comes out in only his boxer shorts to a car.
Michael sees him (I could not see the guy as I was in the door way). Michael tells the guy to at least put on a shirt if he is out on the property. (This guy was "visiting" the single lady living in the unit he came out of.)
The guy blows up and tells Michael to shove it you know where. Michael tells the guy all he is asking is to please put on some clothes if he is outside. The guy yells to Michael to come over and tell him again to his face and he will smash his face in. Michael shows real professional restraint in this situation. As for me, in my painting coveralls, I am looking for a hammer handle or something, and Michael sees that and blocks the door, shaking his head no at me. To sum up the police are called and the guy is removed, along with a "Cease to Enter" being filed against him.
Later Michael tells me this is pretty common, and if you can't find a way around it, you better just give up and go home.
Of course I knew all that, but it has been a long time since I worked that property. In fact, I was the one who got Michael hired to run it. I would say if you can do that kind of restraint, you might survive, I don't know. In my old age, I really can't go there anymore. Your pure Market Rate properties have similar problems, I know that. In reading this post, realize that I could not use the same words as the visitor used back at Michael.

I feel compelled to jump in here! I see this happen all the time on project-based Section 8 properties (and I know we are straying way off the original course ...) I would suggest that the Manager refrain from yelling from a balcony to anyone. I would have whipped out my cell phone and taken a picture. Then, I would handle it with the actual Resident, since the Resident is responsible for the behavior of her "Guests". This guy is a problem simply because this "single lady" invited him to her apartment; therefore, she accepts all responsibility for him walking out to the parking lot in his underwear.

Trust me - Managers have to get the place under control and it starts with enforcing the provisions of the Lease all the time, not selectively, in an unconfrontational manner.

@Mindy

There was no yelling on our part (although I wanted to launch, but restrained) and the tenant herself got her "second written violation of lease". One more and she is history.

HSpencer

Isn't it a shame that people don't have the common sense to not walk to their cars in their underwear and that this was even an issue? :-)

@Pedro, I wish your mother and other parents like her were the rule, but unfortunately they are the exception. In the 13 years I have been dealing with Sect. 8 I have only ever seen 1 young lady make an effort to get out. I was so proud of her we were in tears on her move-out day. This young lady was a single mom who had no choice but to accept a voucher. She worked part time and went to school part-time. She was smart enough to take an internship while she had the voucher and after 2 months was offered a full time position making $38,0000. She moved to a sister community that's a much better place for her child.
Then there are the HCV recipients who drive land rovers and BMW's, have the most expensive clothes, hair, and accessories but only pay $72 in rent. I don't believe in envying other peoples possessions, but it leave a really bad taste in my mouth when I think of how the rest of us have to work just to get by and these people just play the system.
IMHO there should be a time limit for the program. After 2 years you’re out. If you have a child while in the program you are just SOL. If you can't support yourself you have no business bringing another child into this world. Instead we reward irresponsible behavior by having generations of people who rely on government assistance. I would say there should be an exception to the 2 year rule in the case of seniors and those with disabilities. Often times these people don't have the ability to earn an income, and I have no issue what so ever supporting them.
As to dealing with the bureaucracy of the HCV program, it seems from this thread that it all depends on who you are dealing with. As I said before my local agency is a dream, the neighboring agency is a nightmare.

@Everyone

I highly recommend Mindy's blog post on this subject if you have not already seen it.
I couldn't see anything that was not addressed by the blog post article.

As I read Mindy's blog post, it all comes back to me, and I see clearly that everyone in this sector has tried to fight the problems. Yes it is sad.

As Gov Christie said on the news last week, "It seems so many Americans just sit on the couch waiting for the next government check".

Also, I dearly LOVE the post which said "Two Year Maximum Time Limit" on the programs!! Certain recert'd disabilities excluded of course. The elderly and disabled would most likely be excluded, I would think. SSI should do real serious investigations and not just rubber stamp the approvals of disabilities. If disabilities are "real" then by all means increase the assistance. Jerk it if they are playing the gubbermint!!!

Thanks for the nice words, Herb. I appreciate that! We need the government to re-vamp the system, in my opinion. They tried putting restrictions on people receiving cash payments for AFDC and they went to a card system where payments are put onto a "credit-like card." People still sell their food stamp benefits, etc. Oh, we could all go on and on about this topic. It is a complicated world regarding welfare benefits. Sometimes I wish families would go back to taking care of themselves with family members looking out for each other. Instead we have people in the welfare system who started their families as TEENAGERS and they were not emotionally ready to be selfless parents who knew what it took. So, babies often spend time at Grandma's. When I am in court, I have to repress the urge to scream, "Wait! Judge, do you realize who raised this parent???? And you're giving custody of this beautiful two-year-old to the same person who created this selfish, drug-abusing, child abuser who has not felt any love herself?" .... but THAT is a whole other blog post not even appropriate for this venue.

So, to the original poster, Rose, good luck with whatever happens with accepting vouchers. All we can do, any of us, is the best we can with what we have.

@Mindy

My wife and I paid $35.00 a month for a one bedroom duplex when we were first married.
There was no rental assistance, and we of course in '65 were doing pretty well just out of high school. We had a card table for a dining table, and an Ice Chest for a ref! Our HVAC was a Sears Roebuck (I was working for Sears in the service dept) Water Cooler.
Now they call those "swamp coolers". We were soooo happy though!! Our nightly entertainment was listening to the other tenants in the duplex crash their dishes against the wall and fight and cuss each other.

No, I would not want to go back, but then

---

why not?

ps: I am retiring for the fourth time in June of this year if the Managing Agent will grant me permission---lol!

I love that, Herb! The only house my parents ever owned had a mortgage payment of $79! I don't think I plan to ever retire .... I am one of those people who reads 3 things at once, while talking on the phone and typing blog entries while entering invoices and discussing the new updates to the Marketing Plan. I like being busy - I think you are probably like that, too, but this profession benefits from having experience on its teams.

An old friend of ours had a house that was taken by the the state under 'eminent domain' so a new (at the time) freeway could be built. They turned around and bought a new house in a better area for about $1000 more than what the state paid for the house they were going to demolish.

He used to work for Xerox and retired wealthy enough not to need to work again due to some great investments that were part of the corporate package. He was probably one of the smartest people we ever knew.

Great post,I try to work with sec 8 tenants that are a hand up and not a hand out.I also have my preface for agencies.Each section 8 office is different.I work with one where i can place a tenant in 2 weeks.The other takes 6 weeks.I do like that section 8 polices their own.If they don't pay their portion of the rent.The agencies gets on their case.Also if they abuse the rules of section 8 and are discontinued,they can never get back on.

Funny, I had always thought that Refusal to accept Section 8 was a violation of the Fair Housing Laws with regard to income :huh: . Anyway, I do have a bit of a concern with it. I understand that they (Sect.8 holders) need to be screened just as any other applicant. I do, however; find fault with a system that says their credit needs to meet or exceed those of normal income source applicants (for lack of a better term). Generally speaking those on Section 8 are experiencing a financial hardship, therefore their credit probably is suffering. What I would like to see is the Housing Authorities assisting these families in getting their credit back on track (for free). Afterall, many times credit can keep one from a good job or from advancing. Just my 2 cents.

Sherri, in some states and some local municipalities, it is illegal to discriminate based on source of income, so you need to understand if that is applicable to you or not. For those with a Section 8 Voucher, they should adhere to the same screening standards as anyone else according to your company policies. Those with Vouchers may indeed have excellent credit; they just don't make a lot of money and need some assistance to afford the best housing available for them and their families. There are a lot of working poor in this country.

In some states, section 8 is considered income, but in others, it's a voucher based system instead. Our local housing organizations have been unsuccessful thus far in creating legislation that would change the status of Section 8 vouchers so recipients to could live wherever they choose. Even though it can't be used to pay rent, some landlords even count food stamps as income. :)

Many conventional multifamily property owners have mortgages larger than their rental income, making it impossible to assist families in financial hardships. The owners of the building I manage all have day jobs.

Fortunately, there are free training programs available locally for individuals to get them back on track with credit. Some landlords will overlook an applicants' negative credit if they have completed it. :)

I think fair housing law should apply across the board equally. There's nothing "fair" about having a separate set of criteria for individuals who have paid their bills on time vs. those in financial hardships.

(As posted in my earlier post)Funny, I had always thought that Refusal to accept Section 8 was a violation of the Fair Housing Laws with regard to income. Thanks Mindy, I am agreeing that it is illegal to discriminate based on income.All I was trying to say, maybe I didn't word it correctly was that I would like to see less people(with or without section 8 vouchers)turned away due to their credit. I would like to see Housing Authorities work with their participants to heal their credit if needed.

I have to say that the Housing Authorities I work with do offer programs related to credit counseling through other agencies. They also offer classes to prepare people to become homeowners and one component if that is credit prep and repair. But overall, I can say the folks on the front lines there are overworked! They don't have time to do one-on-one counseling. What I also see is adults ruining their children's futures by misusing their kids' social security numbers to get utilities in their names, buy cars, and whatever and completely defaulting. Poor kids don't even know until they get old enough to try for a loan, etc.

Mindy is right, as she often is.... Many housing authorities are simply overworked and understaffed to meet demand and are unable to provide one on one counseling; however, they are often partnered with other local volunteer agencies that can help with a lot of issues, including:

-credit counseling
-debt consolidation
-retirement planning
-income tax preparation
-child custody issues
-medical concerns
-addiction counseling
-employment resources (job search help)
-services for victims of domestic (child/spousal) abuse
-legal aid issues

This may only happen in my area, but I actually feel sorry for people who go to the County Housing Authorities to apply for HUD, or whatever else they get there. While I am no means a HUD expert, I have dealt with HUD vouchers on several properties, ie: those who accepted it all --RD, HUD, HOME and all the stuff that is(or was) out there.
Stories from tenants go (and many believable) that folks are herded around like cattle, treated by clerks that look down there noses at them, and threaten if paperwork is not done up to the standards, etc. And, in a lot of cases we are talking about elderly and disabled people. One of nearby County Housing Authorities was closed for 30 days due to the amount of complaints lodged against it, Congressional's etc.

The bottom line is this: All people are created equal. Financial situations are indeed different but have absolutely NOTHING to do with humanity and being treated with respect. There is NO excuse for a "better than thou" attitude from these housing employees. Additionally, I am more than displeased with the Housing Auhority/Landlord/Property Management relationship that I have observed.

A County Housing Employee has a rather robotic style job: Click the mouse and move the money. That is about it. An apartment manager goes far far beyond that. The manager gets up close and personal in a very good way with the tenant and assists, and assists and even again assists them.

What can we do? Well, aside from the HSpencer method of going down there and cleaning house in his old First Sergeant manner (does no good), we can simply reject that attitude from County Housing. Just simply say no to that mannerism.

Rant over, Back to stacking BBs.

In order to obtain a Section 8 Program Housing Voucher you need to meet many requirements and one of them is falling under the income group that normally qualifies for getting Section 8 Program Housing facilities.
The various income groups are calculated on the median income of the particular city or state and this income may vary from year to year. For instance around 2000 and 2003 the US median income was around $62,200 and in 2008 it rose to around $67,000. So whether you fall under low-income group, very low-income group or extremely low-income group depends on what percentage of the median income constitutes of your total income. Let us quickly go through the various low-income groups.