Ask the Scholar

Page 36 of 80
I can add historical knowledge about this page.

Page image

Page 36

OCR

and owners must seek to reduce the need for vacancy payments and such payments may not be made if the vacancy is the fault of the owner (e.g., the unit does not pass reinspection or a PHA refers a reasonable number of families to the owner, but the owner refuses to select any of them.) Any such vacancy payments would be made out of regular voucher funding (rather than administrative fees). A PHA also would have discretion to reduce the number of units under a project-based voucher contract if no family accepted a unit within 120 days of the notice of vacancy, and reissue the subsidy as a tenant-based voucher. Subparagraph (H) authorizes a revised version of the Housing Production Voucher (HPV) program and the one-time grants as by the Administration in Section 217 of the FY 2001 HUD budget. If funded, thi program would provide vouchers to interested state housing credit agencies that would used to help make a modest portion of low- income housing tax credit developments (and "risk sharing" developments) affordable to families with incomes below 30 percent of the area median income. The state agencies would be free to choose which developments would receive the vouchers, so long as the number of vouchers assigned to any particular development did not exceed 25 percent of the total number of units. Under the Administration's original proposal, families that received the vouchers would have the option of leaving after one year ai taking their vouchers with them. In the revised version authorized in the at n prosal, by contrast, the vouchers would be project-based, ensuring owners secur idy stream. To ensure maximum tenant mobility, however, assisted familie ve a Continued Assistance Option. This would allow families to move and Incep assistance if, for example, they needed to move to be closer to a new job. Other changes from the Administration's proposal are as follows: To simplify administration, the HPV vouchers would work the same way as ordinary project-based vouchers. The primary difference would be the manner of initial distribution of the vouchers. (In addition, as noted above, all families with HPV vouchers would have a Continued Assistance Option.) Vouchers would be allocate under the usual fair share formula used for voucher assistance rathel Chan under the tax credit formula. This would better target scarce resources to areas with greater need for affordable housing by very low- income renters. Any vouchers the state tax credit agency did not designate for use would be reallocated to other states. A standard is included to guide states' selection of PHAs to administer the vouchers. Under this standard, states should select the PHA with jurisdiction over 8/29/00 4

Page data

Page
36
Source index
0
Type
photo
Media ID
311950c8d4160ac5
Size
unknown

Document data

ID
565369970
Core
doc
Type
document
DTO data
{
    "id": "565369970",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565369970",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Project Basing",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565369970",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Domestic Policy Council (Clinton Administration)",
        "Margy Waller's Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025-001.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025-001.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025-001.jpg",
    "imageCount": 80,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Context sent to Scholar

Document identity
{
    "localId": "565369970",
    "label": "Project Basing",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565369970"
}
Document source metadata
{
    "id": "565369970",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565369970",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Project Basing",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565369970",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Domestic Policy Council (Clinton Administration)",
        "Margy Waller's Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025-001.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025-001.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025-001.jpg",
    "imageCount": 80,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565369970",
    "naId": 565369970,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "otherTitles": [
        "7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025"
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
    "seq": 36,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025/7367483-20200317S-017-016-2025-036.jpg",
    "mediaId": "311950c8d4160ac5",
    "ocrText": "and owners must seek to reduce the need for vacancy payments and such payments may\nnot be made if the vacancy is the fault of the owner (e.g., the unit does not pass\nreinspection or a PHA refers a reasonable number of families to the owner, but the owner\nrefuses to select any of them.) Any such vacancy payments would be made out of regular\nvoucher funding (rather than administrative fees). A PHA also would have discretion to\nreduce the number of units under a project-based voucher contract if no family accepted a\nunit within 120 days of the notice of vacancy, and reissue the subsidy as a tenant-based\nvoucher.\nSubparagraph (H) authorizes a revised version of the Housing Production Voucher (HPV)\nprogram and the one-time grants as\nby the Administration in Section 217 of the\nFY 2001 HUD budget. If funded, thi program would provide vouchers to interested\nstate housing credit agencies that would used to help make a modest portion of low-\nincome housing tax credit developments (and \"risk sharing\" developments) affordable to\nfamilies with incomes below 30 percent of the area median income. The state agencies\nwould be free to choose which developments would receive the vouchers, so long as the\nnumber of vouchers assigned to any particular development did not exceed 25 percent of\nthe total number of units.\nUnder the Administration's original proposal, families that received the vouchers would\nhave the option of leaving after one year ai taking their vouchers with them. In the\nrevised version authorized in the at\nn\nprosal, by contrast, the vouchers would be\nproject-based, ensuring owners secur idy stream. To ensure maximum tenant\nmobility, however, assisted familie\nve a Continued Assistance Option. This\nwould allow families to move and Incep assistance if, for example, they needed to\nmove to be closer to a new job.\nOther changes from the Administration's proposal are as follows:\nTo simplify administration, the HPV vouchers would work the same way as\nordinary project-based vouchers. The primary difference would be the manner of\ninitial distribution of the vouchers. (In addition, as noted above, all families with\nHPV vouchers would have a Continued Assistance Option.)\nVouchers would be allocate\nunder the usual fair share formula used for\nvoucher assistance rathel Chan under the tax credit formula. This would better\ntarget scarce resources to areas with greater need for affordable housing by very\nlow- income renters. Any vouchers the state tax credit agency did not designate\nfor use would be reallocated to other states.\nA standard is included to guide states' selection of PHAs to administer the\nvouchers. Under this standard, states should select the PHA with jurisdiction over\n8/29/00\n4"
}