Chabot's proposal puts out tenants
Enquirer In-Depth: Controversial Section 8 plan has time limits, job demands

Written by
Deirdre Shesgreen

WASHINGTON — Greater Cincinnati’s battle over the Section 8 low-income housing program has moved from the streets of the West Side to the corridors of Congress.

House Republicans want to update the federal Section 8 low-income housing program, pushing a bill that would nix old regulations, promote self-sufficiency among renters and save millions of taxpayer dollars.

Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Westwood, has something more sweeping in mind.

Even as his colleagues in the House are pressing ahead with a more modest proposal, Chabot threw a controversial Section 8 overhaul into the legislative hopper earlier this month, sparking a charged debate in Cincinnati and in Washington.

The Westwood Republican’s bill would impose work requirements on most Section 8 recipients, force them out of the program after five years, and bar convicted felons from participating at all, among other things.

In Congress, Chabot’s legislation has already riled advocates for low-income housing and irked Democrats who say it’s a non-starter.

Back home, the Westwood Republican’s new bill has received a warmer reception in some quarters, even as it has reignited a long-simmering debate in the city over the Section 8 program.

Chabot: Section 8 brings 'dilapidated properties'

Also known as the “Housing Choice Voucher Program,” Section 8 gives federal vouchers to low-income individuals and families, including the disabled and elderly, to subsidize the cost of rent. Typically, a recipient pays about 30 percent of the rent and the voucher covers the rest.

There are currently about 10,500 tenants who receive Section 8 vouchers they can use to find their own apartments in Cincinnati, according to data from the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. They pay, on average, $251 per month in rent from their own pockets, with the federal voucher covering the rest.

Proponents say Section 8 is an effective, inexpensive way to help struggling families avoid homelessness and escape poverty-stricken inner-city neighborhoods. Critics such as Chabot say the program is “broken” and “crying out for reform.”

In Cincinnati, Section 8 has been a particularly contentious topic, with the battle lines starkly drawn between the West and East sides of the city.

For years, resentment over Section 8 has bubbled up in Price Hill, Colerain Township and other communities, where residents complain that an over-concentration of Section 8 tenants has led to a gamut of problems – from litter in the neighbors’ yards to crime in the streets. In the past, West Side residents have suggested there was a “concerted effort” by local housing authorities to cluster Section 8 tenants on their side of town, leaving wealthier areas on the East Side with fewer pockets of low-income housing.

Chabot said he introduced his bill because Section 8 vouchers have swamped some neighborhoods, with devastating results.

“If you talk to people on the West Side of town, they would almost to a person tell you that they would attribute some of the deterioration in the neighborhood to an excessive use and over-saturation of Section 8 vouchers,” Chabot said.

“What you see is dilapidated properties that aren’t kept up,” he added. “We’ve seen a reduction in property values. We’ve seen an increase in rates of crime.”

Others say the opposite is true.

“Section 8 doesn’t go into an area of high property values and all of a sudden the property values tank,” said Pete Witte, chairman of the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority board. “Something is already at work that makes investors attracted” to an area, and that has pushed rents down to rates that are affordable for low-income residents.

“That’s what starts the trigger of Section 8 in an area,” he said. “So it all just keeps working together.”

Some landlords 'get their money ... and move on'

Last year, HUD released a study, conducted by researchers at New York University, which concluded there is “little evidence” to support the contention that “voucher holders invite or create crime.” But the study’s authors also said that testing the causal relationship between vouchers and crime is difficult, and their results should be considered preliminary.

Witte, too, said the issues at play in Westwood and other communities are complicated and intertwined – and any explanations for a drop in property values or a spike in crime are, too.

“Over the years I’ve had many, many people send me addresses of (problem) properties that they just always assume are associated with the Section 8 program,” he said. And more than 60 percent of time, he said, they are wrong.

David Linnenberg, a Green Township trustee, said Section 8 is “perceived very negatively, based on what is happening in surrounding communities that we have to drive through.”

Passing through Westwood and Price Hill, Green Township residents see run-down apartments and assume they are Section 8.

“I don’t think it’s quite as bad as everyone portrays it to be,” he said, but the program needs to be reformed.

“You can blame the tenants, but at the end of the day the landlords are the ones responsible for taking care of the building,” he said. “There are too many landlords with properties in Westwood and Price Hill who don’t live there and don’t care. They get their money – or the government’s money – and they move on.”

Still, both Linnenberg and Witte said there are elements of Chabot’s bill they like, such as the time limit on assistance.

“There are parts of what (Chabot) has proposed that are definitely worth discussing,” Witte said. “Whether they will ever get discussed in Washington, D.C., is another matter.”

Simplistic answers 'make politicians feel good'

While Chabot calls his bill a “common-sense” proposal, critics call it punitive and counterproductive.

“These are hard issues, and simplistic answers might make politicians feel good,” said Barbara Sard, vice president for housing policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal Washington research organization.

“But they don’t necessarily improve the lives of poor families or save federal resources.”

The main competition for Chabot’s bill is a proposal pushed by Rep. Judy Biggert, R-Ill., chair of the House Financial Services subcommittee on housing, to modernize Section 8 and wean recipients off the program.

Her subcommittee approved her Affordable Housing and Self-Sufficiency Improvement Act by voice vote in February. The full committee is expected to take it up in the coming weeks.

Biggert’s bill would loosen current annual property-inspection rules, freeing up housing officials to focus on troubled properties. It would also require the federal Housing and Urban Development agency to expand programs that connect voucher recipients with job training, education and other self-sufficiency initiatives.

Biggert’s bill would allow HUD to go to a two-year inspection schedule, from the current annual requirement, for properties that are generally in good shape, so they could focus on ones that are more problematic.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates it would save at least $900 million over five years.

Chabot said he supports any Section 8 reform effort, adding that he might try to attach his bill as an amendment to other pending proposals.

But Sard said Chabot’s measure would be a “poison pill,” too hard for Democrats in Congress to swallow even if attached to a more palatable proposal.

“It would be a symbolic action that would kill the broadly supported changes” in the Biggert bill, she said.

Quote:Point, counterpoint on key elements of Chabot’s low-income housing reform bill

Recipients of Section 8 vouchers would
be limited to five years on the program

Proponents say that’s needed to give people an incentive to get back on their feet financially and free up vouchers for other needy families.
Section 8 “has far too often become a permanent way of life,” Chabot said.

But tenant advocates point out that nationally and locally, more than half of Section 8 recipients don’t currently stay in the program for more than five years. In Cincinnati, 53 percent of Section 8 tenants “are in and out in five years,” noted Linda Couch, a senior vice president at the National Low Income Housing Coalition.
Among the 47 percent who stay longer, many are disabled or elderly – groups that Chabot exempts in his bill. “What’s left is a population that’s extremely poor, extremely low-skilled, and vulnerable,” said Couch. If Chabot’s bill became law, she said, they would probably become homeless – and more expensive to deal with for the government.

Felons and illegal immigrants would be
barred from participating in the program

Chabot said that would help “weed out bad apples” and shield “hard-working, law-abiding people” from convicted criminals.
But federal law already makes some convicts, such as sex offenders and people who have produced methamphetamine on public housing property, ineligible for Section 8. Beyond that, housing authorities have discretion about who can qualify for the program, including the ability to bar those with a recent history of illegal drug use.
“To say we’re never going to help a person who was convicted of a felony and served their time, I wonder if Mr. Chabot appreciates that we have a lot of people coming out of prison who are looking to stabilize their lives,” said Couch.
Illegal aliens also are already prohibited from getting vouchers, although a legal resident can let an undocumented friend or relative stay with them in a Section 8 rented house. Chabot’s bill would cut off assistance to such households.

Every member of a family receiving a Section 8 voucher 18 years or older would be required to perform at least 20 hours of “work activities” per week, with exceptions for the elderly, disabled and some single parents.
He said it’s a way for “requiring people to give back,” adding that residents might be able to fulfill the mandate by cleaning up around their apartment complex or doing other community service work.
But advocates point to statistics showing that about 75 percent of voucher households that are not elderly or disabled already work or participate in other programs that have work requirements.
Elizabeth Brown, executive director of Housing Opportunities Made Equal, a Cincinnati fair housing group, said Chabot’s proposal “seems to be based on a whole lot of stereotypes” that Section 8 recipients are “just people sitting around not doing anything.”

Have your say

Contact Rep. Steve Chabot:
441 Vine Street, Rm. 3003
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Phone: 513-684-2723
Email: Via submission form at chabot.house.gov

Compare the bills

Rep. Steve Chabot’s bill, called the “Section 8 Reform, Responsibility, and Accountability Act of 2012,” would:
Bar felons and illegal immigrants from participating in the Section 8 program.
Terminate Section 8 assistance to any family that includes a member who has previously received such assistance for five years or longer, with an exception for individuals who are elderly or disabled.
Mandate that every member of a family receiving a Section 8 voucher who is 18 years of age or older perform at least 20 hours of “work activities” per week. The bill provides exceptions for those who are 62 years and older; blind or disabled; and single parents, with children under 6 years old, who cannot find appropriate or affordable child care.
Require local public housing agencies to give preference in awarding Section 8 vouchers to families that include a member who is a veteran.
Require voucher holders to adhere to all local laws and ordinances.
Rep. Judy Biggert’s bill, the Affordable Housing and Self-Sufficiency Improvement Act, would:
Allow public housing agencies to conduct property inspections every two years, instead of annually, and permit inspectors to accept certificates from other federal and state agencies if the standards are the same or more stringent. This would allow Section 8 officials to devote more time to problem properties. The measure also adds protections for tenants living in properties that fail inspection.
Streamline the income verification and rent-setting processes, and increase the minimum payments that Section 8 recipients must contribute toward their rent, from the current $25 to $50 base to at least $69.45 per month.
Require all public housing authorities to participate in the Family Self Sufficiency Program (FSS), a federal initiative under which Section 8 recipients can get help with employment assistance and a savings incentive program. It would also make FSS available to all residents of assisted housing.
Make permanent a pilot program called Moving to Work, under which local housing agencies can get waivers from federal laws and regulations to test innovative strategies aimed at helping tenants become self-sufficient.
Update the current income calculations for veterans and prevent certain veterans’ benefits from being tallied as income, making them more likely to be eligible for aid.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120...038&Ref=AR