To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Languages
Recent
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

New Jersey's 12th congressional district

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

New Jersey's 12th congressional district
New Jersey's 12th congressional district (2013).svg
District map as of 2013
Representative
  Bonnie Watson Coleman
DEwing Township
Distribution
  • 97.6% urban
  • 2.4% rural
Population (2017)758,189
Median income$85,595[1]
Ethnicity
Cook PVID+16[2]

New Jersey's Twelfth Congressional district is represented by Democrat Bonnie Watson Coleman. The district is known for its research centers and educational institutions such as Princeton University, Rider University, The College of New  Jersey, Institute for Advanced Study, Johnson & Johnson and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    1 856
    1 100
    4 464
    1 716
    1 011
  • ✪ Landlord Acceptance of Housing Choice Vouchers
  • ✪ Askwith Debates – Charter Schools: Expanding Opportunity or Reinforcing Divides?
  • ✪ Get A Coffee ☕ - 4 Hour RussianVids Flat Earth Documentary 2018
  • ✪ Title IX over Time || Radcliffe Institute
  • ✪ The College Class Day 2017

Transcription

SO, UM, EARLIER THIS WEEK, UM, I WAS AT ANOTHER SESSION AND I FOUND THAT A JOKE HELPED QUIET THE AUDIENCE. SO I'M GOING TO TRY A JOKE HERE. MY COLLEAGUE, LINDA, MENTIONED THIS TO ME IN THE HALLWAY. SO THE QUESTION IS, WHY WAS THE COMPUTER LATE TO WORK? BECAUSE IT HAD A HARD DRIVE. [LAUGHING]. WELCOME, EVERYONE. THANK YOU FOR JOINING US FOR THIS IMPORTANT DISCUSSION. WHAT'S A KICK OFF EVENT FOR OUR LANDLORD LISTENING FORUMS. I'M TODD RICHARDSON. I'M THE GENERAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY IN HUD'S OFFICE OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH OR LESS BUREAUCRATICALLY, I'M HEADING UP THE RESEARCH OFFICE AT HUD. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. I AM DANIELLE PAST E.R.A.sH. IN MORE BUREAUCRATIC CEVICHE, I'M THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR THE PUBLIC HOUSING AND VOUCHER PROGRAMS. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, COULD WE GET A SHOW OF HANDS, HOW MANY PEOPLE HERE TODAY ARE LANDLORDS, PROPERTY MANAGERS OR THE LIKE? JUST RAISE YOUR HAND. ALL RIGHT. WONDERFUL. HOW MANY FOLKS HERE ARE FROM HOUSING AUTHORITIES? GOT A COUPLE. OKAY. AND THE REST OF YOU. [LAUGHING] WONDERFUL. ALL RIGHT. GOOD. >> SO OUR PROGRAM IS DESIGNED TODAY TO FIRST TELL THE AUDIENCE KIND OF WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO ASK THE AUDIENCE TO TELL US WHAT YOU THINK OR WHAT QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. SO I DO HAVE UNFORTUNATELY WE HAD MADE THE MISTAKE OF SCHEDULING THIS EVENT BEFORE WE KNEW WHAT DAY THE SECRETARY WOULD BE GOING TO PUERTO RICO AS PART OF THE ANNIVERSARY OF HURRICANE MARIA. AS BAD LUCK WOULD HAVE IT, THE SECRETARY IS IN, FOR US, THE SECRETARY IS IN PUERTO RICO TODAY. HE'S SORRY HE COULD NOT BE HERE TO TELL YOU WHY HE'S CREATED THIS NEW TASK FORCE AT HUD, BUT WE ARE FORTUNATE TO HAVE HIS SENIOR ADVISER THAT FOCUSES ON THE VOUCHER PROGRAM ISSUES AND HE'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE SECRETARY'S GOALS FOR THIS TASK FORCE. >> AND THEN THE SENIOR ADVISER, JOHN BRAVACOS, WILL BE FOLLOWED BY KEVIN KANE, OUR VERY OWN HUD ECONOMIST WHO WILL REMIND US ABOUT HOW RENTAL MARKETS ARE LOCAL AND THEY VARY WIDELY ACROSS THE COUNTRY. >> THEN WE'LL HAVE SOME BRIEF PRESENTATIONS FROM THE RESEARCHERS THAT ACTUALLY THERE'S TWO RESEARCH STUDIES THAT LED THE SECRETARY TO WANT TO CREATE THIS TASK FORCE ON LANDLORD PARTICIPATION. SO MARY CUNNINGHAM FROM THE URBAN INSTITUTE AND EVA ROSEN OF GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY WILL BE PRESENTING THOSE RESULTS. >> I FEEL LIKE WE'RE PRESENTING AT THE OSCARS WITH THE BACK AND FORTH SO BEAR WITH US. BUT THEN THAT WILL GET US TO THE EVENT THAT WE'RE REALLY ALL HERE FOR TODAY, WHICH IS A PANEL DISCUSSION THAT WILL BE MODERATED BY THE VOUCHER PROGRAM DIRECTOR STEVE DURHAM. PARTICIPATING WILL BE THE TWO RESEARCHERS. THEN WE ALSO HAVE THE DC HOUSING AUTHORITY VOUCHER PROGRAM DIRECTOR, RON McCOY. THEN WE HAVE THE CEO OF AVANATH CAPITAL WHO IS DARYL CARTER. HIS COMPANY OWNS 9,000 APARTMENTS ACROSS 16 STATES. THIS WILL HOPEFULLY LEAD TO A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM YOU, THE AUDIENCE. >> BUT BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I WANT US TO SET THE STAGE WITH TWO THINGS. FIRST IS A VERY QUICK HISTORY OF THE HCV PROGRAM AND THEN SOME GUESSES WE HAVE ON THE NUMBER OF LANDLORDS IN THE UNITED STATES. >> OKAY. SO VERY QUICKLY, WHAT WE NOW KNOW IS THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM WAS REALLY BORNE OUT OF THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION IN THE 1970s WHEN WE WERE LOOKING FOR A PRIVATE SECTOR ALTERNATIVE TO THE PUBLIC HOUSING PROGRAM. SO IN THE EARLY '70s, THERE WERE A FEW HOUSING ALLOWANCE EXPERIMENTS AND THEN IN 1974, THE HOUSING CERTIFICATE PROGRAM WAS CREATED. ABOUT TEN YEARS LATER, 1983, THIS WAS FOLLOWED UP BY A PARALLEL MORE FLEXIBLE PROGRAM CALLED THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER. AND THEN IN 1998, THE TWO PROGRAMS WERE MERGED AND NOW WE HAVE WHAT IS KNOWN AS THE SECTION 8 HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM. >> NOW TO THE QUESTION OF THE NUMBER OF LANDLORDS. WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE A PERFECT NUMBER FOR THIS, SO WE'VE GUESSED A BIT WITH OTHER SURVEYS THAT WE'VE DONE. SO WE DO KNOW THERE'S ABOUT 48 MILLION RENTAL UNITS IN THE COUNTRY, 44 MILLION OF THOSE ARE OCCUPIED. THERE ARE TWO PRIMARY FORMS OF OWNERSHIP. THE FIRST ARE INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS. WE ESTIMATE THERE ARE ABOUT 23 MILLION UNITS OWNED BY ROUGHLY 10 MILLION INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS. SO AN INTERESTING FACT ABOUT THIS GROUP IS THAT IT GREW IN SIZE, IT ACTUALLY INCREASED IN THE NUMBER OF THESE SMALL INVESTORS DURING THE FORECLOSURE CRISIS AS MANY PREVIOUSLY OWNER OCCUPIED UNITS SHIFTED INTO THE RENTAL MARKET. INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS ARE LIKELY TO OWN DUPLEX AND RENTAL HOMES. WE OFTEN DESCRIBE THESE INVESTORS AS MOM AND POP LANDLORDS. THE SECOND GROUP ARE BUSINESS ENTITIES. WE FIGURE THERE'S FEWER THAN A MILLION OF THESE BUSINESS ENTITIES. THEY'RE PRIMARILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS, LIMITED LIGHTNING COMPANIES AND LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPS. THEY OWN THE REMAINING 25.8 MILLION UNITS. A SPLIT BETWEEN THE MOM AND POPS AND THE LARGER BUSINESS ENTITIES IN TERMS OF WHO OWNS THE UNITS IN THE COUNTRY. THE BUSINESS ENTITIES TEND TO BE THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT OWN THE MULTIFAMILY PROPERTIES. >> AND SO TODAY, WE WANT TO HEAR FROM BOTH TYPES OF OWNERS. AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM IS THE NATION'S LARGEST RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY. IT SERVES OVER TWO MILLION LOW INCOME FAMILIES. IT'S CURRENTLY ABOUT $22 BILLION A YEAR BUDGET. IF WE KEEP GROWING LIKE WE'RE GROWING, IT WILL BE ABOUT $30 BILLION WITHIN THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. AND THE VOUCHER PROGRAM'S SUCCESS IS LARGELY DEPENDENT ON THE PARTICIPATION OF PRIVATE MARKET OWNERS. AND THEN ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CERTAIN PROJECTS, LIKE LIHTC AND SOME HOME PROJECTS, FEDERAL LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE A PRIVATE MARKET LANDLORD TO PARTICIPATE IN THE VOUCHER PROGRAM. >> SO HUD HAS BEEN VERY CONCERNED WITH TIGHTENING RENTAL MARKETS AND HOW THAT'S EFFECTING VOUCHER FAMILIES BEING ABLE TO FIND WILLING OWNERS TO LEASE TO THEM. IN OUR ADMINISTRATIVE DATA, WE HAVE BEEN SEEING A STEADY DECLINE IN THE NUMBER OF LANDLORDS. HERE IS A METRIC I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO TEST OUT WITH THIS GROUP. THERE'S A BUNCH OF PEOPLE HERE I SEE ARE RESEARCHER TYPES. WE CAN SEE HOW WELL THIS GOES. SO IN 2010, THERE WERE IN OUR DATA 39.3 LANDLORDS PER 100 TENANT BASED VOUCHERS. IN 2018, THERE ARE 4.2 LANDLORDS PER 100 TENANT BASED VOUCHERS. THAT'S A DECLINE OVER THE EIGHT YEAR PERIOD VERSUS LANDLORDS PER VOUCHER. THIS IS TROUBLING BECAUSE AS I NOTED EARLIER, THERE'S ACTUALLY BEEN A TREND TOWARDS MORE OVERALL LANDLORD IN THE MARKET BETWEEN 2010 AND 2018, SO THAT'S GOING AGAINST WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT WITH SEEING THIS INCREASED NUMBER OF LANDLORDS WOULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD EXPECT OUR VOUCHER POPULATION TO MATCH BUT IT'S NOT. WE'RE ACTUALLY SEEING A DECLINE IN THE NUMBER OF LANDLORDS TAKING VOUCHERS. >> OKAY. SO TO GET US STARTED, WE'RE VERY PLEASED TO INTRODUCE JOHN BRAVACOS OF SECRETARY CARSON'S OFFICE WHO WILL MAKE A FEW OPENING REMARKS ON BEHALF OF THE SECRETARY. JOHN HAS HAD A DISTINGUISHED CAREER BOTH INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF HUD. HE BEGAN PRACTICES LAW IN 1988, FOCUSING ON REAL ESTATE, DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND BUSINESS. FROM 2007 THROUGH 2009, JOHN WAS HERE AT HUD. HE WAS THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR IN REGION 3. SO HE WAS SUPERVISING OPERATIONS FOR PENNSYLVANIA, VIRGINIA, WASHINGTON, D.C., DELAWARE AND WEST VIRGINIA. HE THEN RETURNED TO PRIVATE PRACTICE IN 2009. ONE OF HIS AREAS OF FOCUS WAS TO WORK WITH TROUBLED SUBSIDIZED PROPERTIES. SO JOHN IS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE CHALLENGES THAT ARE FACED TODAY BY LANDLORDS, DEVELOPERS AND REAL ESTATE PRACTITIONERS. IN AUGUST OF 2017, JOHN THEN RETURNED BACK TO HUD AS THE SENIOR ADVISER TO THE SECRETARY BEN CARSON AND HE IS CURRENTLY THE SENIOR ADVISER TO THE PUBLIC HOUSING, HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER AND INDIAN HOUSING PROGRAMS. WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO HAVE HIM HERE TODAY. JOHN? [ APPLAUSE ] >> THANK YOU TODD AND DANIELLE. I APPRECIATE IT. I THINK THE REAL REASON THAT I'M HERE IS BECAUSE THE DEPUTY SECRETARY IS ALSO IN PUERTO RICO AND THERE'S A FEW OTHER PEOPLE AHEAD OF ME ON THE CHAIN THAT ARE OTHERWISE OCCUPIED. NONETHELESS, I'M GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE. I ALSO WANT TO THANK YOU, THE HOUSING AUTHORITY PEOPLE, THE CHALLENGES THAT YOU FACE AND THE WORK THAT YOU DO IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES. MANY TIMES WE FORGET WITHIN THE AGENCY WELL, THOSE OF US THE MORE TEMPORARY FOLKS FORGET WITHIN THE AGENCY HOW MUCH IT TAKES TO RUN, MAINTAIN AND CONTINUE IN A HOUSING AUTHORITY IN THE MIDST OF A SERIES OF CHALLENGES. AS TO THE LANDLORDS, THE FOLKS WHOM WE HOPE TO GAIN A LOT OF INFORMATION AS THIS PROCESS GOES FORWARD, THANK YOU AS WELL, TO TRY TO CONTINUE TO SERVE THE RANGE OF THOSE THAT YOU NEED TO, YOU KNOW INVESTORS, THE TENANTS, AS WELL AS THE REST OF THE FOLKS THAT ARE INVOLVED. IT'S NOT ALWAYS AN EASY PLACE. I THINK WHAT WE HOPE TO DO THROUGH THIS IS TO FIND OUT HOW TO MAKE THIS WORK BETTER. TODAY WE'RE REALLY HERE TO HAVE AN IMPORTANT CONVERSATION ABOUT LANDLORDS. HOW WE CAN ENCOURAGE MORE LANDLORDS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LARGEST RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN THE NATION AND HOW TO HOUSE MORE LOW INCOME FAMILIES WITHIN THEM. HUD'S HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM HELPS MORE THAN TWO MILLION HOUSEHOLDS IN THE PRIVATE MARKET. THAT'S AN ENORMOUS NUMBER AND THAT'S QUITE A CHALLENGE. THERE ARE CHOICES IS PART OF THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER. THE EVIDENCE DEMONSTRATES THAT IN SOME AREAS, VOUCHER RECIPIENTS HAVE VERY LITTLE CHOICE ABOUT WHERE THEY CAN LIVE. OFTEN CONCENTRATED IN NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THERE'S MANY OTHER VOUCHERS AND A FAIR AMOUNT OF OTHER POVERTY. IT'S NOT THE BEST PATH AND IT'S NOT WHAT THE PROGRAM HOPES TO ACCOMPLISH. TODAY YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR WHAT THE RESEARCH IS TELLING US ABOUT THE CHALLENGES THESE FAMILIES FACE WHEN THEY ATTEMPT TO USE THEIR VOUCHERS TO FIND A HOME. OUR REPORTS TELL US THAT THE THINGS THAT MANY OF YOU ALREADY KNOW, THAT IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT PROCESS FOR THOSE FAMILIES. THE SECRETARY RECENTLY ESTABLISHED A DEPARTMENT WIDE LANDLORD TASK FORCE TO EXAMINE HOW WE CAN DIRECTLY ENGAGE THE LANDLORDS AND THE PROPERTY MANAGERS TO MAKE A CHANGE IN THIS PROBLEM. THE GOAL OF OUR TASK FORCE IS TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THOSE WE RELY ON TO MAKE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM WORK AND WORK BETTER. IN THE COMING WEEKS, HUD PLANS TO HOST LANDLORD FORUMS IN ATLANTA; DALLAS/FORT WORTH; PHILADELPHIA; LOS ANGELES; SALEM, OREGON AND SALT LAKE CITY. SO WE'LL BE TRAVELING THE COUNTRY TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM LANDLORDS ABOUT HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS CRITICAL PROGRAM MORE USER FRIENDLY FOR THE LANDLORD, MORE SUCCESSFUL FOR THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER RECIPIENTS AND MORE EFFECTIVELY ADMINISTERED THROUGH OUR AGENCY. WE'LL LOOK FOR THE PAIN POINTS, THOSE PARTS THAT ARE PART OF THE REASONS WHY WE DON'T HAVE MORE LANDLORDS IN THE PROGRAM. LISTENING FORUMS ARE DESIGNED AND INTENDED TO REVEAL WHAT HUD CAN DO WITHIN OUR WITHIN THE SPECTRUM OF THE LAWS WE FACE TO MAKE THE PROGRAM MORE ACCESSIBLE, MORE ACCEPTABLE IN A LARGER PART OF WHERE THOSE RESIDENTS CAN CHOOSE TO LIVE. SO WHAT WE HEAR WILL HELP US GUIDE AS WE LOOK TO MAKE WHATEVER OTHER CHANGES WE CAN DO, STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND SO FORTH JUST TO MAKE THIS WORK BETTER. SO THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE HERE TODAY. I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU DO AND THE SECRETARY IS VERY GRATEFUL FOR THIS PROCESS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ] >> ALL RIGHT. BEFORE I HAVE KEVIN KANE COME UP HERE, KEVIN IS HOUR CHIEF HOUSING MARKET ANALYST. HE'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE VARIETY OF HOUSING MARKETS WE HAVE ACROSS THE COUNTRY. FOCUSING ON THE RENTAL MARKET SPECIFICALLY. SO I DO WANT TO RAISE ONE THING. FOR FOLKS WHO ARE HERE WHO HAVE YOUR PHONE, WE'RE GOING TO TRY SOMETHING OUT FOR THIS SESSION USING A TECHNOLOGY CALLED SLIDO LATER ON. WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU THE EMAIL PRESENTATION FOR THAT. WHILE YOU'RE SORT OF, IF YOU CAN, SIGN ON TO THE HUD WI FI NETWORK. IT'S CALLED HUD GUEST WI FI ON YOUR PHONE. ONCE YOU SIGN ON TO THAT, WE'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE URL SO YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SIGN ON TO AND WE'RE GOING TO DO SOME POLLING, LIVE POLLING. THIS IS HUD MY EXPERIENCE WITH TECHNOLOGY IS THAT SOMETIMES WE DON'T SUCCEED, BUT WE'RE GOING TO GIVE IT A SHOT. [LAUGHTER] SO WITH THAT, I TURN YOU OVER TO KEVIN KANE, OUR CHIEF HOUSING MARKET ANALYST. [ APPLAUSE ] KEVIN: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, TODD. IT'S BEEN A GOOD WEEK FOR ME. THIS WEEK, HUD WE HAD OUR FIELD ECONOMISTS WERE IN TOWN THIS WEEK SO I'M A FIELD ECONOMIST MYSELF. IT'S ALWAYS A GOOD TIME TO GET TO SPEND WITH MY COLLEAGUES. WE DON'T GET TO SEE EACH OTHER TOO MUCH. WE'RE SPREAD ACROSS THE COUNTRY. BUT WHEN WE DO GET TOGETHER, WE LIKE TO SPEND OUR TIME DOING WHAT FIELD ECONOMISTS DO THE BEST AND THAT'S ATTENDING HAPPY HOURS. BUT NO, JUST JOKE ON TOP. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF GOOD WORK DONE. AS FIELD ECONOMISTS, WE ANALYZE HOUSING MARKETS AROUND THE COUNTRY AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THOSE MARKETS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF TRYING TO ASSESS HOW MUCH ADDITIONAL DEMAND THERE IS FOR HOUSING. WHAT BUILDERS SHOULD PROVIDE. SO, YOU KNOW, YOU THINK ABOUT LANCASTER, PENNSYLVANIA, HOW MANY UNITS NEED TO GO THERE TO ACHIEVE A BALANCED MARKET IN THAT AREA. YOU'D BE AMAZED ALL THE DIFFICULT QUESTIONS THAT POP UP. FOR EXAMPLE, TRYING TO AVERAGE ESTIMATE THE AVERAGE SIZE FOR THE AMISH. THAT CAN BE DIFFICULT AS WELL. ON TO THE REPORT HERE. WE'RE GOING TO BE FOCUSING ON THE RENTAL MARKETS TODAY. IF YOU'VE LIST END TO MY BRIEFINGS IN THE PAST, WE GENERALLY LOOK AT THE SALES IN THE RENTAL MARKETS. WE'RE GOING TO CATER THIS SPECIFIC I WILL TO THE RENTAL MARKET. AS OF THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2018. I WANT TO THANK RANDALL GOODNIGHT. HE PUT TOGETHER ALL THE MAPS THAT YOU'LL SEE IN MY PRESENTATION THIS AFTERNOON AS WELL AS DOING A LOT OF NUMBER CRUNCHING BEHIND THE SCENES AS WELL. SO LET ME GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF CURRENT HOUSING MARKET CONDITIONS. JUST AS A BIT OF A BACKGROUND. BALANCED CONDITIONS EXIST WHEN THE QUANTITY OF HOUSING SUPPLIED EQUALS THE QUANTITY OF HOUSING DEMANDED. THE QUANTITY OF HOUSING EXCEEDS THE QUANTITY DEMANDED AND WE HAVE A HOUSING SURPLUS. TIGHT MARKETS OCCUR WHEN DEMAND EXCEEDS SUPPLY AND WE HAVE A HOUSING SHORTAGE. THERE'S A LOT OF VARIATION AS WE'LL SEE IN THE NEXT SLIDE. THE OVERALL RENTAL VACANCY RATE IN THE SECOND QUARTER 2018 AND THAT INCLUDES THE RATE FOR APARTMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AS WELL AS FOR MOBILE HOMES. THAT WAS 6.8% DOWN FROM 7.3% A YEAR AGO. THE RENTAL VACANCY RATE FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WAS 5.7% IN THE SECOND QUARTER AND THAT'S RELATIVE TO 6.1% A YEAR AGO. THE RENTAL VACANCY RATE FOR MULTIFAMILY UNITS THAT INCLUDE BUILDINGS OF FIVE OR MORE UNITS IN THE STRUCTURE, THAT WAS 8.4% DOWN FROM 9% A YEAR AGO. BASED ON REESE DATA, THE APARTMENT VACANCY RATE WAS UP BY HALF A PERCENTAGE POINT A YEAR AGO TO 4.8% IN THE SECOND QUARTER WHILE RENTS INCREASED BY 4.5% FROM A YEAR AGO. 56% OF APARTMENTS THAT WERE COMPLETED IN THE FIRST QUARTER WERE ABSORBED IN THE SECOND QUARTER AND THAT COMPARES WITH A RATE OF ABSORPTION OF ABOUT 55% A YEAR AGO. SO NOT MUCH HAS CHANGED. MULL FAMILY PRODUCTION INCREASED BY 3% IN THE SECOND QUARTER RELATIVE TO A YEAR AGO. LET'S TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT THE APARTMENT MARKETS AROUND THE COUNTRY. MANY APARTMENT MARKETS AROUND THE COUNTRY ARE BALANCED BUT THERE'S A LOT OF VARIATION IN THESE CONDITIONS. THIS MAP SHOWS THE AVERAGE APARTMENT VACANCY RATE FOR EACH HUD REGION. ACCORDING TO REESE DATA, THE NATIONAL APARTMENT VACANCY RATE WAS 4.8% IN THE SECOND QUARTER. THIS WAS UP FROM 4.7% IN THE FIRST QUARTER. AND FROM 4.3% A YEAR AGO. VACANCY RATES RANGED FROM 3.8% IN THE PACIFIC TO 5.8% IN THE SOUTHWEST. THE SEVEN REGIONS THAT ARE IN BLUE HAD A VACANCY RATE THAT'S ABOVE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE AND THE THREE REGIONS IN BROWN WERE BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE. THIS NEXT MAP SHOWS THE CHANGE IN THOSE VACANCY RATES DURING THE SECOND QUARTER RELATIVE TO A YEAR AGO. THE NATIONAL VACANCY RATE INCREASED BY HALF A PERCENTAGE POINT. VACANCY RATES WERE UP IN ALL REGION OF THE COUNTRY. SO THE ENTIRE COUNTRY IS SHOWN IN BLUE. YOU CAN SEE A DEFINITE PATTERN WITH DARKER BLUE ON THE TOP. THE DARKER BLUE AREAS INCREASED BY MORE THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE. THE LIGHTER BLUE AREAS ON THE BOTTOM INCREASED BY LESS THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE. RATES INCREASED, THEY RANGED FROM 0.1% IN THE SOUTHWEST TO A.9% IN NEW ENGLAND, IN NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY AND IN THE ROCK MOUNTAIN ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION. THEY'VE BEEN RISING SINCE REACHING A LOW OF 1. 4% IN THE QUARTER OF 2016. RENTS WERE UP BY FOUR AND A HALF PERCENT NATIONALLY. THAT'S FROM THE SECOND QUARTER 2017 TO THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2018. RENTS GREW IN ALL REGIONS OF THE COUNTRY, AGAIN ALL IN BLUE. THE FIVE REGIONS IN DARKER BLUE INCREASED BY FASTER THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE AND THAT WAS LED BY THE NORTHWEST WHICH WAS UP BY 5.8%. REGIONS IN THE LIGHT BLUE WERE UP BY LESS THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE. THE AVERAGE MARKET RENT IN THE SECOND QUARTER FOR THE 274 MARKET AREAS THAT ARE COVERED BY REESE WAS 1,405 DOLLARS. THIS IS AN AMAZING STATISTIC. RENTS INCREASED IN 273 OF THE 274 AREAS. THOSE ARE ALL IN BLUE SO YOU CAN SEE ALMOST ALL THE COUNTRY IS IN BLUE, EXCEPT FOR THE LONE BROWN DOT ON THERE. IF YOU LOOK REAL CLOSE, YOU SEE THAT ITHACA, NEW YORK, THE RENTS WERE DOWN BY 1% IN ITHACA, NEW YORK. THERE WERE 20 AREAS OF THE COUNTRY WHERE THE RENT INCREASE WAS MORE THAN 6 AND A HALF PERCENT. THOSE ARE SHOWN IN THE DARKEST SHADE OF BLUE AND THAT'S LED ABOUT A 26% INCREASE IN ODESSA, MIDLAND. THAT'S DRIVEN BY THE GAS AND OIL INDUSTRY THERE. DOUBLE DIGIT GAINS ALSO OCCURRED IN FORT COLLINS, COLORADO AS WELL AS IN CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA. WE CAN LOOK AT RENT AND VACANCY DATA BY APARTMENT CLASS AS WELL. SO THIS IS USING REESE DATA. CLASS A APARTMENTS, THOSE ARE THE HIGHEST QUALITY APARTMENTS AND THEN WE ALSO LOOK AT CLASS B, C APARTMENTS WHICH ARE MORE MODERATE TO LOWER QUALITY. RENTS WERE UP BY 4.2% FOR THE CLASS A APARTMENTS FROM A YEAR AGO A. THEY ROSE BY 3.7% FOR THE B/C UNITS. THE CURRENT VACANCY RATE FOR CLASS A APARTMENTS IS 6.3% AND THAT'S UP BY 0.7 PERCENTAGE POINTS FROM A YEAR AGO. THE B/C VACANCY RATE IS 3 AND A HALF PERCENT AND THAT'S UP BY 0.3 PERCENTAGE POINT FROM A YEAR AGO. THIS MAP SHOWS THE METROPOLITAN AREAS IN THE COUNTRY BROKEN INTO FOUR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES RELATIVE TO THE NATIONAL FAIR MARKET RENT. THE NATIONAL FAIR MARKET RENT FOR TWO BEDROOM UNITS IS $1,103. MARKETS WITH AN AVERAGE TWO BEDROOM RENT THAT WAS AROUND THE FAIR MARKET RENT WE CONSIDER THOSE TO BE MEDIUM COST AREAS AND THOSE ARE SHOWN IN LIGHT BLUE. THE RENTS IN THOSE AREAS RANGE FROM $910 TO $1,289. THIS IS BASICALLY ONE STANDARD DEVIATION ABOVE AND BELOW THE NATIONAL FAIR MARKET RENT OR ROUGHLY $189 ABOVE $189 BELOW WITH A LITTLE BIT OF ROUNDING INVOLVED. MARKETS WITH RENT BELOW $910 ARE CONSIDERED LOW COST. THOSE ARE SHOWN IN DARK BLUE. IF THE RENT WAS BETWEEN $1,2 90 AND $1,479, THAT'S CONSIDERED AS A HIGH COST AREA, THOSE ARE SHOWN IN LIGHT BROWN. AREAS WITH A RENT OF $1,480 AND ABOVE ARE WHAT WE CALL EXTREMELY HIGH COST AREAS AND THOSE ARE SHOWN IN DARK BROWN. YOU CAN SEE THE CONCENTRATIONS OF THE HIGH COST AND EXTREMELY HIGH COST AREAS ARE ON THE WEST COAST AND THE NORTHEAST PART OF THE UNITED STATES. HERE WE TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE AREAS BY COST AND ANALYZE THE APARTMENT MARKET CONDITIONS IN THOSE AREAS. YOU CAN SEE THE PERCENTAGE OF MARKETS IN EACH COST CATEGORY THAT ARE CONSIDERED TO BE SOFT, BALANCED OR TIGHT. WE COMBINED THE HIGH AND THE EXTREMELY HIGH COST CATEGORIES. SO, 50% OF THE LOW COST AREAS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE SOFT AND OF THE HIGH AND EXTREMELY HIGH COST AREAS, 38% OF THOSE MARKETS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE TIGHT. THE PERCENTAGE OF MARKETS THAT TEND TO BE SOFT TEND TO BE LESS AS THE COST INCREASES. SO 50% OF THE LOW COST AREAS, 26% OF THE MEDIUM COST AREAS AND 10% OF THE HIGH OR EXTREMELY HIGH COST AREAS. AND ALSO THE PERCENT OF MARKETS THAT ARE BALANCED OR TIGHT TENDS TO INCREASE AS COSTS RISE. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE RATES FOR BALANCED MARKETS GOES FROM 28% AT THE LOW COST AREA TO 46% TO 52% AS THOSE COSTS RISE. AND FOR TIGHT MARKETS, THE SAME THING. WE HAVE 22% FOR THE LOW COST AREAS, 28% AT THE MEDIUM COST AND 38% FOR THE HIGH COST AREAS. THE NEXT THREE MAPS THAT WE SHOW BREAK OUT THOSE COSTS AND CONDITIONS. SO THERE'S 42 METRO AREAS THAT ARE CONSIDERED TO BE HIGH OR EXTREMELY HIGH COST AROUND THE COUNTRY. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THOSE ARE CONCENTRATED ON THE COASTS. ABOUT 52% OF THESE MARKETS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE BALANCED AND THOSE ARE SHOWN IN THE LIGHT BLUE. 38% ARE TIGHT SHOWN IN THE DARK BLUE AND 10% ARE SOFT. LOOKING AT THOSE MEDIUM COST AREAS, AGAIN, STILL HAVE CONCENTRATION ON THE COASTAL AREAS BUT NOT AS STRONG AS WHAT WE SAW IN THE HIGH AND EXTREMELY HIGH COST MARKETS. 46% OF THESE MARKETS ARE CONSIDERED BALANCED. 26% ARE SOFT AND 28% ARE TIGHT. AND THERE ARE 218 LOW COST AREAS AND THAT REPRESENTS ABOUT 60% OF THE TOTAL MARKET AREAS IN THE COUNTRY. MUCH MORE DISBURSED AROUND THE COUNTRY. AND ABOUT 50%, HALF OF THESE MARKETS ARE CONSIDERED SOFT, 28% ARE BALANCED AND 22% ARE TIGHT. THE NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS THAT WERE PERMANENT INCREASED BY 3% TO 118,100 UNITS DURING THE SECOND QUARTER. MULTIFAMILY PERMITTING WAS UP IN FOUR OF TEN REGIONS WITH GAINS RANGING FROM 11% IN THE GREAT PLAINS TO 44% IN THE SOUTHWEST. THE NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS PERMITTED DECLINED IN FIVE REGIONS WITH DECLINES RANGING FROM 7% IN THE PACIFIC TO 28% IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS. THE LEVEL OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS PERMITTED IN THE NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY AREA REMAIN THE SAME RELATIVE TO A YEAR AGO. THIS NEXT FIGURE SHOWS THE ANNUAL NEW APARTMENTS BUILT SINCE 2000 BROKEN INTO THREE DIFFERENT CLASSES BASED ON THEIR RENT RELATIVE TO THE FAIR MARKET RENT. THE LIGHT BLUE CATEGORY THAT'S UP ON THE TOP, THOSE ARE THE PERCENTAGE OF UNITS THAT WERE ADDED WITH RENTS THAT WERE 1.5 TIMES HIGHER THAN THE FAIR MARKET RENT. SO THESE AREAS HAD A RENT THAT WAS 150% HIGHER THAN THE FAIR MARKET RENT. THE YELLOW CATEGORY HAD RENTS BETWEEN 1.2 TIMES OF THE FAIR MARKET RENT AND 1.5 TIMES BELOW THE FAIR MARKET RENT OR 120% OR 150% OF THE FAIR MARKET RENT. THE BLACK CATEGORY ON THE BOTTOM HAD RENTS THAT WERE LESS THAN 1.2 TIMES THE FAIR MARKET RENT OR LESS THAN 120% OF THE FAIR MARKET RENT. YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS CATEGORY ON THE BOTTOM HAD A RECENT PEAK IN 2009 WHEN APPROXIMATELY 57% OF NEW APARTMENTS HAD RENTS THAT WERE BELOW 120% OF THE FAIR MARKET RENT. THAT DECLINED THROUGH 2015 TO A LEVEL OF JUST 13%. IT HAS GONE UP SLIGHTLY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. FROM 2000 TO 2010, THESE UNITS ACCOUNTED FOR ABOUT 43% OF NEW UNITS. SINCE 2011, THEY ONLY ACCOUNTED FOR 21% OF NEW UNITS. NOT SURPRISINGLY, THE PERCENT OF APARTMENTS BUILT AT 150% OF THE FMR ARE GREATER INCREASED FROM 17% IN 2009 TO 47% IN 2015. FROM 2013 TO 2016, THESE UNITS ACCOUNTED FOR MORE THAN 40% OF THE TOTAL UNITS EACH YEAR. THE UNITS ADDED BETWEEN 120% AND 150% OF THE FMR SHOWN IN YELLOW ACCOUNTED FOR ABOUT 33% OF NEW UNITS FROM 2000 TO 2010, BUT THAT'S RISEN TO 41% SINCE 2011. AND THEN THIS FIGURE SHOWS HOW MUCH HIGHER THE AVERAGE RENT FOR NEW APARTMENTS ADDED TO THE MARKET WAS ABOVE THE FMR. GIVEN THE PAST 20 YEARS, WE PEAKED FROM TWITTER FROM 2013 TO 2016. FROM 2000 TO 2010, RENTS ON AVERAGE FOR NEW UNITS WERE 33% HIGHER THAN THE FAIR MARKET RENT. SINCE 2010, THAT'S INCREASED TO AN AVERAGE OF 50%. ANOTHER SEGMENT OF THE RENTAL MARKET THAT WE WANT TO TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT IS SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. FOR THE NATION AS A WHOLE, 35% OF RENTER HOUSEHOLDS LIVE IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THIS PERCENTAGE CAN VARY SIGNIFICANTLY ACROSS MARKET AREAS AND PARTICULARLY BETWEEN URBAN AND RURAL SETTINGS. THIS MAP SHOWS THE PERCENTAGE OF RENTER HOUSEHOLDS THAT RESIDE IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AREAS IN BROWN ARE AT OR BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE AND THAT INCLUDES NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY AT 15%. NEW ENGLAND AT 18%. AND THE MIDWEST AT 35%. THE REST OF THE COUNTRY IS ABOVE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE WITH RATES RANGING FROM 36% IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS TO 44% IN THE GREAT PLAINS. AND HERE WE LOOK AT THE PERCENTAGE OF SINGLE FAMILY RENTAL HOUSEHOLDS THAT ARE SECTION 8 VOUCHER HOLDERS. I HAVE TO GIVE A LITTLE CAVEAT TO THIS FIGURE. WE'RE COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT SOURCES OF DATA FOR LOOKING AT THE TOTAL RENTER HOUSEHOLD POPULATION, WE USE THE CENSUS BUREAU. WE'VE GOT SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED, SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE VOUCHER HOLDER DATA, THE CATEGORIES THERE DON'T MATCH UP PERFECTLY WITH WHAT WE HAVE IN THE CENSUS, SO THERE'S SOME POTENTIAL FOR SOME DISCREPANCIES THERE. THE CATEGORIES THAT WE USED ARE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, ROW HOUSES AND TOWNHOMES AND A CATEGORY THAT'S CALLED SEMIDETACHED. THERE'S A POSSIBILITY THERE COULD BE RENTAL HOUSING IN SOME OF THAT SO WE MAY THESE NUMBERS, AGAIN, TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT'S GOING ON BUT THERE MAY BE FLUCTUATION WITH THESE NUMBERS DEPENDING ON HOW WE CALCULATE THIS. SO FOR THE NATION AS A WHOLE, WE CALCULATED THE NUMBER AS 7%. MOST OF THE COUNTRY RANGES BETWEEN 4 AND 7% WITH THE DEPOSITION OF NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY AT 18% AND NEW ENGLAND AT 16%. JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, WHEN WE TOOK OUT THAT LAST CATEGORY OF SEMIDETACHED AND RAN THE NUMBERS AGAIN, THESE NUMBERS IN NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY AND NEW ENGLAND WERE STILL HIGHER THAN THE REST OF THE NATION, BUT THE NUMBER IN NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY DROPPED 11%. THE NUMBER IN NEW ENGLAND DROPPED DOWN TO%. RENTERS IN THOSE TWO REGIONS THEY'RE MUCH MORE LESS LIKELY TO LIVE IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. BUT IF THEY LIVE THERE, THEY'RE MORE LIKELY TO BE VOUCHER HOLDERS. IN SUMMARY, RENTAL MARKET CONDITIONS ARE BALANCED IN MANY MARKETS AROUND THE COUNTRY. APARTMENT RENTS WERE UP FOUR AND A HALF PERCENT FROM A YEAR AGO AND VACANCY RATES WERE UP 4.5 PERCENTAGE POINT FROM A YEAR AGO TO A LEVEL OF 4.8%. THE VACANCY RATE HAS BEEN RISING SINCE THE THIRD QUARTER OF 2016. WE LOOKED AT COSTS RELATIVE TO MARKET CONDITIONS AND SAW THAT 50% OF THE LOW COST MARKETS ARE SOFT. AND MORE THAN 50% OF THE HIGH OR EXTREMELY HIGH COST AREAS ARE BALANCED. IN RECENT YEARS, THERE'S BEEN A HIGHER CONCENTRATION OF APARTMENT CONSTRUCTION WITH RENTS THAT ARE 150% OR MORE ABOVE THE FAIR MARKET RENT THAN DURING THE PREVIOUS DECADE. VOUCHER HOLDERS MAKE UP ABOUT 7% OF SINGLE FAMILY RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN THE NATION AND HAVE A MUCH LARGER SHARE IN NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY AND THE NEW ENGLAND REGION. IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, FEEL FREE TO CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FIELD ECONOMIST OR YOU CAN ALWAYS CONTACT ME. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. I WILL HAND THINGS BACK OVER TO TOM. >> THANK YOU. AND OUR NEXT PRESENTATION IS FROM MARY CUNNINGHAM, SHE'S A SENIOR FELLOW AND VICE PRESIDENT FOR METROPOLITAN HOUSING AND COMMUNITY POLICIES AT THE URBAN INSTITUTE WHERE SHE OVERSEES A GROUP OF 50 RESEARCHERS THAT WORK ON RESEARCH WITH HOUSING POLICY. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. THANK YOU TO HUD FOR HAVING ME HERE TODAY AND FOR FUNDING THIS REALLY IMPORTANT STUDY. SO I HAVE BEEN TOLD I HAVE 15 MINUTES. I'M GOING TO TRY TO STICK TO IT. I HAVE MY TIMER UP HERE TO SHARE THE RESULTS FROM OUR PILOT STUDY OF LANDLORD ACCEPTANCE OF HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS. AS MANY PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM KNOW, HOUSING VOUCHERS ARE DESIGNED TO HELP LOW INCOME FAMILIES AFFORD DECENT SAFE HOMES AND HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE OUT ECONOMICALLY AND RACIALLY SEGREGATED NEIGHBORHOODS. VOUCHERS ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE FAMILIES CHOICE, BUT IN THEORY, VOUCHER HOLDERS CAN MOVE ANYWHERE ACROSS THE COUNTRY, BUT WE KNOW THEIR CHOICES ARE ACTUALLY CONSTRAINED, CONSTRAINED BY THE HOUSING MARKET, AND ALSO REALLY DEPENDENT ON LANDLORD PARTICIPATION AND THE PROGRAM. MOST PLACES ACROSS THE COUNTRY, LANDLORDS DECIDE IF THEY WANT TO ACCEPT VOUCHERS. SO THEY HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF INFLUENCE IN DECIDING CAN VOUCHER HOLDERS USE THEIR VOUCHER AND ALSO WHERE THEY CAN LIVE. YET DESPITE THIS INFLUENCE, WE DON'T KNOW A LOT ABOUT LANDLORD BEHAVIOR AND LANDLORD PERCEPTIONS OF THE PROGRAM. SO OUR STUDY PRESENTS SIGNIFICANT INSIGHTS INTO THESE QUESTIONS. SO BEFORE I START, I JUST WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE STUDY, WHICH TOOK FOUR AND A HALF YEARS TO COMPLETE. IT'S THE COLLECTIVE WORK OF MANY PEOPLE, AND I WANT TO RECOGNIZE MY COLLEAGUES, CLAUDIA, DOUG AND LISA, AS WELL AS MANY OTHERS. THE LIST IS TOO LONG. BUT SOME OF THEM ARE HERE TODAY. CAN YOU RAISE YOUR HANDS, PLEASE. THANK YOU. IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN TALKING ABOUT THE STUDY, YOU CAN ALSO FIND MY COLLEAGUES. AT THE START OF THE STUDY IN 2013, WE SET OUT TO ANSWER A LOT OF QUESTIONS. NOT A LOT WAS KNOWN ABOUT LANDLORDS AT THIS TIME. FIRST WE WANTED TO KNOW DO LANDLORDS ACCEPT VOUCHERS. NEXT, DO THEY TREAT VOUCHER HOLDERS DIFFERENTLY THAN OTHER SIMILAR RENTERS? AND WHAT ARE THE TYPES AND PATTERNS OF DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT AGAINST THOSE WHO HAVE HOUSING VOUCHERS? ALSO WHAT IS THE EXTENT OF DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT BASED ON VOUCHERS FOR BLACK, WHITE, HISPANIC RENTERS AND DOES IT DIFFER FROM THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THE RENTER IS LOCATED. THIS IS A NEW STUDY, AND IT'S A PILOT. WE WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE THE APPROPRIATE TESTING METHODOLOGIES FOR MEASURING DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT FOR THOSE WITH HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS. I WANT TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR TESTING APPROACH. WE STARTED WITH A RANDOM SAMPLE OF AVAILABLE RENTAL UNITS SELECTED TO MATCH EACH OF OUR STUDY SITES, AND TO FIND APARTMENTS, WE SCREENED ADS, CRAIGSLIST, MANY OTHER ONLINE SOURCES IN OUR TARGET AREAS, AND ONCE WE FOUND AN ELIGIBLE OPPORTUNITY, OUR TESTER CONTACTED THE LANDLORD AND ASKED THEM IF THE UNIT WAS STILL AVAILABLE. THEY CHECKED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE UNIT ACTUALLY MET THE PROGRAM RENTAL CAP AND THEY ASKED THE LANDLORD IF THEY ACCEPT HOUSING VOUCHERS, AND THIS IS WHAT WE CALL THE VOUCHER ACCEPTANCE TEST. IF A LANDLORD STATED THAT VOUCHERS WERE ACCEPTED, THE UNIT AD WAS ASSIGNED TO A TESTER PAIR TO CONDUCT A TELEPHONE TEST, AND THIS TEST WAS REALLY INTENDED TO MEASURE DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT ON EACH TESTER, ONE WITH A VOUCHER AND ANOTHER CONTROL TESTER WHO WAS MATCHED ON ALL CHARACTERISTICS EXCEPT FOR HAVING A VOUCHER, CONTACTED THE LANDLORD INDEPENDENTLY. WHEN THE VOUCHER TESTER CALLED THE LANDLORD, SHE MENTIONED THAT SHE HAD A VOUCHER AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CALL. EACH OF THE TESTERS GATHERED KEY INFORMATION ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY, THE COST OF THE RENT, THE UTILITIES, APPLICATION PROCESS, SECURITY DEPOSIT, FEES AND OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS. THE TELEPHONE TEST IN WHICH BOTH TESTERS OBTAINED AN OPT PROCEEDED TO THE LAST STEP, WHICH IS THE PAIRED IN PERSON TEST WHERE THEY WENT AND THEY ACTUALLY VIEWED A UNIT AND THEY TALKED TO THE LANDLORD. THEY FOLLOWED SIMILAR PROCEDURES AS THE TELEPHONE TEST. SO THESE ARE OUR TESTER PROFILES. FOR OUR PARENT TEST WE MATCHED ON GENDER, MARITAL STATUS, CREDIT SCORE, RACE AND ETHNICITY. THE TESTERS PORTRAYED SINGLE MOTHERS OR GRANDMOTHERS OF ONE TO FOUR CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN, AND TESTERS DESIGNATED AS VOUCHER HOLDERS WERE DESIGNED HOUSEHOLD INCOMES BASED ON 30% OF AMI. THEY WERE BASED ON 30% OF AMI PLUS THE VALUE OF THE VOUCHER. SO THESE ARE OUR TEST SITES, AND I WILL READ THEM OFF TO YOU. FORT WORTH, LOS ANGELES, NEWARK, PHILADELPHIA AND WASHINGTON, D.C. WE CONDUCTED THE ACCEPTANCE TEST IN ALL FIVE SITES AND THEN IN THREE SITES FORT WORTH, NEWARK, AND LOS ANGELES, AND WE CONDUCTED THE PAIR TESTS EACH SITE CONTAINED MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS, CITIES AND COUNTIES, AND I'M REFERRING TO THE CITY BY THE LARGEST IN THE TESTING AREA. THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENCES IN THESE SITES IN TERMS OF HOUSING MARKET, IN TERMS OF THE VOUCHER POPULATION, PHA MANAGEMENT, SOME OF THESE SITES HAVE LOCAL SOURCE OF INCOME PROTECTIONS WHICH MAKE IT ILLEGAL FOR LANDLORDS TO REJECT HOUSING VOUCHERS, AND IN NEWARK, WASHINGTON, D.C. AND SOME PARTS OF PHILADELPHIA, THERE ARE SOURCE OF INCOME PROTECTIONS, AND NONE IN FORT WORTH AND LOS ANGELES, AND OTHER VARIATIONS, AND DC HAS NEIGHBORHOOD BASED PAYMENT STANDARDS, AND THERE'S LOTS OF VARIATION GOING ON ACROSS THESE SITES, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE CHOSE ALL THESE DIFFERENT SITES. SO OUR TESTING TOOK PLACE FROM APRIL 2016 TO JULY 2017 AND OVER 14 MONTHS OF TESTING, WE SCREENED 341,000 ONLINE ADVERTISEMENTS AND WE CONDUCTED 3700 VOUCHER ACCEPTANCE TESTS, WHICH IS MORE THAN WE ANTICIPATED, BUT FEWER TELEPHONE AND IN PERSON TESTS. WE CONDUCTED 694 PHONE TESTS AND 509 IN PERSON TESTS. THE MAJORITY WERE CONDUCTED IN NEWARK, NEW JERSEY, AND I WILL EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHY THIS IS SO WHEN I GET A LITTLE FURTHER ALONG IN THE FINDINGS, WHICH ENOUGH ABOUT METHODOLOGY. LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT WE FOUND. THE FIRST QUESTION THAT WE ANSWERED WAS HOW DIFFICULT IS IT TO FIND VOUCHER AFFORDABLE UNITS. WHAT WE FOUND WAS THAT IT WAS PRETTY DIFFICULT. BUT IT REALLY DIFFERED DRAMATICALLY ACROSS SITES, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THEMES FROM THIS REPORT TODAY, WHICH IS LOCATION REALLY DOES MATTER. SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE FIELD TEAM SIFTED THROUGH MORE THAN 431,000 ADS FOR THE FIVE STUDY SITES TO IDENTIFY 8700 UNITS THAT WERE AVAILABLE AND MET THE RENTAL CAP SO THAT WE COULD TEST IN THESE UNITS. ON AVERAGE, THAT'S ABOUT 39, VIEWING 39 ADS TO GET TO ONE UNIT WHERE WE COULD TEST. FINDING A UNIT WAS TOUGHEST IN LA AND NEWARK WHERE WE SCREENED ABOUT 52 ADS TO FIND ONE ELIGIBLE UNIT AND LOWEST IN PHILADELPHIA WHERE WE SCREENED ABOUT 11 UNITS TO FIND ONE ELIGIBLE AD. OUR TESTING PRODUCT DIDN'T MATCH EXACTLY WHAT A VOUCHER LOOKED LIKE, SOME VARIATION, AND WHAT WE LEARNED ALONG THE WAY IS THAT IT'S PRETTY DIFFICULT TO FIND A UNIT WHEN YOU ARE SEARCHING WITH A HOUSING VOUCHER. THE NEXT QUESTION WE REQUESTED IS DO LANDLORDS ACCEPT HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS? WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT THERE'S CLEAR EVIDENCE OF VOUCHER DENIAL IN ALL THE SITES, BUT THE DENIAL RATES REALLY VARIED SIGNIFICANTLY. SO DENIAL RATES WERE HIGHEST IN FORT WORTH WHERE 78% OF LANDLORDS REJECTED VOUCHER HOLDERS, AND NEXT IN LA WHERE 76 OF LANDLORDS DO NOT ACCEPT SECTION 8. SOMEWHAT LOWER, BUT STILL HIGH IN PHILADELPHIA, 67% OF LANDLORDS, AND SUBSTANTIALLY LOWER IN NEWARK, 31%, AND IN WASHINGTON, D.C. 15%. CLEAR EVIDENCE OF DENIAL BUT REALLY VARIATION ACROSS THE SITES. WE FOUND THAT VOUCHER DENIALS WERE MORE COMMON IN LOW POVERTY AREAS THAN HIGH POVERTY AREAS, AND A LANDLORD WAS MORE LIKELY TO SAY NO TO A VOUCHER HOLDER IF THEY HAD A UNIT IN A LOWER POVERTY AREA. THE FIRST BAR BASICALLY SHOWS THE OVER ALL DENIAL RATE. THE SECOND SHOWS THE DENIAL RATE AND LOW POVERTY AREAS, AND THE THIRD BAR SHOWS LOW RATE IN HIGH POVERTY AREAS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SECOND BAR AND THE THIRD BAR, WHICH IS COMPARING LOW POVERTY TO HIGH POVERTY. FORT WORTH, LOS ANGELES, NEWARK, AND PHILADELPHIA ALL SHOW DIFFERENCES WHERE WASHINGTON, D.C. YOU DIDN'T SEE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LOW POVERTY AND HIGH POVERTY. THE NEXT QUESTION WE LOOKED AT IS DO LANDLORDS TREAT VOUCHER HOLDERS DIFFERENTLY THAN OTHER APARTMENT SEEKERS. THESE ARE THE PAIR TESTS, AND THE PAIRED TELEPHONE AND PAIRED IN PERSON TEST. WE WANTED TO LOOK AT A RANGE OF DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT STARTING WITH REQUIREMENTS THAT THE LANDLORD PLACED ON THE APPLICANT TO QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE UNIT, AND SO WHAT KINDS OF INFORMATION DO THEY REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT? ALSO WHAT WERE THE RED FEES, INCENTIVES AND MOVE IN COSTS AND WHAT KIND OF COMMENTS ABOUT THE LANDLORD MAKE WHILE THE TEST WAS GOING ON? OUR TESTERS RECORDED ALL OF THIS INFORMATION IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE HERE THAT THE TELEPHONE TESTS AND THE PAIRED IN PERSON TEST MOVED FORWARD IF THE LANDLORD SAID THEY ACCEPTED HOUSING VOUCHERS. WE WANTED TO GET A LITTLE FURTHER ALONG IN THE PROCESS AND CAPTURE MORE NUANCE FORMS OF TREATMENT. WE MOVE FORWARD ONLY IF THE PAIRED TEST ACCEPTED VOUCHERS FROM THE START. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO NOTE HERE IS THAT I'M ONLY PRESENTING FINDINGS FROM NEWARK, BECAUSE THE RATES OF REJECTION IN LA AND FORT WORTH WERE SO HIGH THAT WE COULDN'T KEEP MOVING FORWARD TO DO THE TELEPHONE AND IN PERSON TEST. WE DID MOST OF OUR PAIR TESTING IN NEWARK, NEW JERSEY AND DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH SAMPLE SIZE TO PRESENT THE LA RESULTS, BUT THEY ARE IN THE APPENDIX IF YOU WANT TO CHECK IT OUT. FOR THE MOST PART IT REVEALED MINIMAL EVIDENCE OF DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT AGAINST VOUCHER HOLDERS THAT ONCE AN ELIGIBLE UNIT WHO STATED THE ACCEPTED HOUSING VOUCHERS WERE IDENTIFIED, AND NEARLY ALL THE VOUCHER HOLDERS AND CONTROL TESTERS WERE ABLE TO OBTAIN INFORMATION ABOUT HOUSING AND SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT. THERE WAS MINOR DIFFERENCES, AND FOR EXAMPLE, THE CONTROL TESTERS WITHOUT A VOUCHER WERE TOLD ABOUT MORE UNITS BUT ONLY SLIGHTLY MORE UNITS, AND 1.2 TO 1.1. NOT REALLY A BIG DIFFERENCE. WE DID, ON THE OTHER HAND, FIND THAT LANDLORD SCRUTINIZED NONVOUCHER HOLDERS ABILITY TO PAY THE PRESENT MORE THAN THEY SCRUTINIZED VOUCHER HOLDERS, WHICH MAKES SENSE, GIVEN WE KNOW THE VOUCHER HOLDER COMES WITH A SUBSIDY. THEY WERE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE LIKELY TO TELL THE VOUCHER TESTER THEY WERE QUALIFIED FOR THE UNIT DURING THE PHONE TEST, COMPARED TO THE NONVOUCHER HOLDER, AND THEY WERE ALSO LESS LIKELY TO ASK THE VOUCHER HOLDER FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR INCOME, THEIR OCCUPATION OR THEIR EMPLOYMENT. SO THEY WERE ASKING THE CONTROL TESTER WITHOUT A VOUCHER THESE QUESTIONS MORE OFTEN. LANDLORDS WERE MORE LIKELY TO ASK THE VOUCHER TESTER HOW THEY WOULD PAY THE SECURITY DEPOSIT, WHICH ALSO MAKES SENSE, BECAUSE WE KNOW VOUCHER HOLDERS ARE OFTEN THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SECURITY DEPOSIT AND THAT IS OFTEN A CHALLENGE TO COME UP WITH WHAT IS A PRETTY BIG AMOUNT OF MONEY TO SIGN UP FOR THE APARTMENT FOR THEM. FINALLY LANDLORDS WERE LESS LIKELY TO TELL THE VOUCHER TESTERS ABOUT INCENTIVES FOR MOVING IN, AND THEY DID TELL THE NONVOUCHER HOLDERS ABOUT INCENTIVES. MOVING ONTO THE IN PERSON TESTS, WHAT WE FOUND AGAIN WAS VERY SIMILAR, SIMILAR TREATMENT BUT ONE BIG DIFFERENCE, WHICH IS THAT THE VOUCHER TESTERS WERE MORE LIKELY TO BE STOOD UP BY THE LANDLORD FOR THE APARTMENT VIEWING, WHICH IS ABOUT 8 PERCENTAGE POINTS DIFFERENCE. SO THE VOUCHER TESTER, THE CONTROL TESTER BOTH COULD MAKE AN APPOINTMENT, AND THERE WERE HIGH RATES OF NO SHOWS OVERALL IN THIS PART OF THE MARKET, BUT WHEN WE HAD OUR REPORTS IN FROM THE VOUCHER TESTER VERSUS THE CONTROL TESTER, THE VOUCHER TESTERS WERE BEING STOOD UP MORE OFTEN. THEN SIMILAR AND CONSISTENT RESULTS WITH THE TELEPHONE PAIRS, WHICH IS IT SEEMED LIKE THE LANDLORDS WERE REALLY SCRUTINIZING THE NONVOUCHER HOLDERS TO SEE IF THEY COULD PAY THE RENT AND WHAT THE INCOME WAS, WHICH AGAIN MAKES SENSE. SO THE PRIMARY GOAL OF THIS STUDY WAS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER OR NOT HOUSING OF VOUCHER HOLDERS EXPERIENCED DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT COMPARED TO NONVOUCHER HOLDERS. THIS REALLY LED US TO DESIGN THE STUDY SO THAT WE WERE PAIRS, VOUCHER AND NONVOUCHER HOLDER WERE MATCHED ON EVERYTHING, INCLUDING RACE, EXCEPT FOR THE VOUCHER AND INCOME. ALSO INTERESTED IN LOOKING TO SEE AND UNDERSTANDING POTENTIAL DIFFERENCES BY RACE, AND WHAT OUR PLAN WAS TO DO WAS LOOK OUT TO SEE IF THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE VOUCHER HOLDER AND NONVOUCHER HOLDER, AND SEE IF THOSE DIFFERENCES WERE BIGGER THAN THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE WHITE VOUCHER HOLDER AND NONVOUCHER HOLDER. WE COULD ONLY LOOK AT RESULTS IN NEW YORK. WHAT WE FOUND IS WE COULDN'T DETECT DIFFERENCES, BUT WE HAD LOW SAMPLE SIZES AND, THIS IS ONE SITE. WE CAUTIONED AGAINST DRAWING CONCLUSIONS FROM THIS FINDING. IN ADDITION, WE LOOKED AT POVERTY RATES AND AGAIN WE FOUND THAT THE SAMPLE SIZES, BECAUSE THERE WAS SUCH A HIGH RATE OF REJECTION AT THE FIRST PART OF THE TEST, THE VOUCHER ACCEPTANCE TEST, IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO GET ENOUGH SAMPLE FOR THE PAIRED PARTS OF THE TEST. SO IT WAS DIFFICULT TO LOOK AT DIFFERENCES IN POVERTY RATE AS WELL. SO I'M NOT GOING TO READ THIS IN BRIEF SIZE IN 15 MINUTES. I CAN FEEL TODD GLARING AT ME, BUT I WANT TO SAY WE DID MAKE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH IN THE REPORT, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, AND I WILL LET YOU DIG INTO THAT CHAPTER YOURSELF, BUT ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS IS WE NEED TO HEAR MORE FROM LANDLORDS AND UNDERSTAND THEIR PERSPECTIVES, AND I'M EXCITED HUD HAS LUNCHED THE LISTENING TOUR, AND THERE ARE LANDLORDS HERE, AND WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT ARE YOUR PERCEPTIONS AND BARRIERS TO PARTICIPATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE VOUCHER PROGRAM. >> WE DID MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO APPROVE THE PROGRAM. I WILL TOUCH ON THOSE QUICKLY. 1, WE RECOMMENDED ENCOURAGING LANDLORD PARTICIPATION FOR DOING ACTIVE RECRUITMENT FOR LANDLORDS, PARTICULARLY IN LOW POVERTY AREAS, AND ENSURES THAT THE VOUCHER RENT CAPS WERE SET COMPETITIVELY, USING SMALL AREA, AND EXPLORE FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR LANDLORDS AND REALLY IMPROVE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OVERALL. WE ALSO RECOMMENDED SUPPORTING HOUSING VOUCHER HOLDERS BY HELPING THEM TROUBLE SHOOT, SECURITY DEPOSIT ASSISTANCE, AND MAKING IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO NAVIGATE THE HOUSING MARKET. LASTLY WE RECOMMENDED PURSUING LOCAL STATE AND LOCAL PROTECTIONS FOR VOUCHER HOLDERS TO MAKE SURE THERE ISN'T DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT OR DISCRIMINATION IN THE MARKET. SO I WANT TO THANK HUD FOR HAVING ME HERE TODAY, ALSO THANK THE LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT WERE PARTNERS IN THE STUDY, AND LASTLY PAUL JOYCE, WHO IS OUR PARTNER AT HUD HERE, A GREAT GTR, AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO IT WITHOUT YOU. SO THANKS. [APPLAUSE] >> MARY TELLS ME THAT WAS 17 MINUTES. THANK YOU, MARY. BEFORE I INTRODUCE OUR NEXT SPEAKER, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT THIS NEXT STUDY WAS JUST GOOD LUCK, AND THE TIMING OF THESE TWO STUDIES TOGETHER IS EVEN BETTER LUCK. WE HADN'T PLANNED TO DO A STUDY INTERVIEWING LANDLORDS. THIS CAME TO US THROUGH OUR RESEARCH PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM, AND LET THEM GIVE A SHOT, AND WE WILL SEE IF THAT WILL WORK. IT HAPPENED TO COME OUT AND BE DONE AT THE SAME TIME AS THIS STUDY, SO IT'S A BIT MORE OF THE WHY, AND AVA ROSEN, WHO IS OUR SPEAKER HERE, IS AN ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AT GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY'S MCCOURT SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY, AND SHE STUDIES SOCIAL INEQUALITY IN THE URBAN COMPLEX. THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF THE WHY. THANKS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME TODAY. TODD, LET ME KNOW IF I GO OVER. I WILL TRY TO STICK TO THE 17. SO HI, EVERYONE. I WANT TO FIRST ACKNOWLEDGE, ACTUALLY FIRST I WANT TO I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE MY COAUTHORS, AND I WILL BE TALKING ABOUT RESULTS FROM THE REPORT THAT TODD MENTIONED AND ALSO A PAPER THAT WE WROTE WITH MANY OF THE SAME RESULTS, AND SO MY COAUTHOR, STEPHANIE DELUCA AND KATHERINE EDEN ON THIS PAPER. TODAY I'M GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT RESEARCH LOOKING AT THE SUPPLY SIDE OF SUBSIDIZED HOUSING, AND SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT HOW LANDLORDS THINK ABOUT THE NATION'S LARGEST SUBSIDIZED HOUSING PROGRAM. WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT A LOT ABOUT IT, THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM. THIS PAPER COMES OUT OVER A FOUR YEAR MIXED METHODS PROJECT IN THREE CITIES, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND, DALLAS, TEXAS, AND CLEVELAND, OHIO, DESIGNED TO STUDY HOW HOUSING SUPPLIERS SHAPE THE RESIDENTIAL OUTCOMES OF POOR FAMILIES. THE BIG QUESTION WE ARE INTERESTED IN HERE IS WHY THE PROGRAM IS NOT DOING A BETTER JOB AT 1, HELPING FAMILIES FIND HOUSING AND 2, HELPING POOR FAMILIES MOVE TO SAFER LOW POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS. THERE'S A NUMBER OF ANSWERS TO THIS QUESTION, OF COURSE, BUT THE ONE THAT I WILL DISCUSS TODAY IS WHETHER OR NOT LANDLORDS CHOOSE TO ACCEPT TENANTS WITH VOUCHERS, WHAT MOTIVATES THEM TO DO SO, AND WHY SOME REFUSE. THE FIRST POINT I WANT TO EMPHASIZE HERE, SINCE THE 1970s THERE'S AN ENORMOUS TRANSITION IN HOW HOUSING IS DISBURSED. ITS STOCK DECLINED AND VOUCHERS INCREASED DRAMATICALLY TO FILL THAT GAP, WHICH MEANS MORE AND MORE THE PRIVATE MARKET HAS BEEN LEVERAGED FOR FEDERAL HOUSING PROGRAMS. MOST OF US IN THIS ROOM PROBABLY KNOW QUITE A BIT ABOUT HOW THE VOUCHER PROGRAM WORKS, BUT SOME QUICK HIGHLIGHTS. THE HVC PROGRAM IS DESIGNED TO SERVE VERY LOW INCOME FAMILIES, AND WHEN A FAMILY RECEIVES A VOUCHER THEY PAY 30% OF THEIR INCOME IN RENT, AND HUD PAYS THE REST DIRECTLY TO THE LANDLORD WHO UNDERGOES AN ANNUAL INSPECTION, AND HUD LIMITS THE AMOUNT THEY CAN CHARGED BASED ON FAIR MARKET RENT, WHICH WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN LANDLORDS WOULD QUALIFY CHOOSE NOT TO PARTICIPATE? FIRST OF ALL, WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT MANY FAMILIES CAN'T SUCCESSFULLY BE SUBBED WITHIN THE ALLOTTED 120 DAYS, AND THIS CHART COMES FROM A 2001 HUD REPORT SHOWING THAT AROUND 2001 HUD REPORT, WHICH IS THE LAST YEAR THEY RELEASED DATA ON THESE SEPARATE RATES THAT WE HAVE. AT THIS POINT AROUND A THIRD OF ALL FAMILIES GIVEN A VOUCHER AND TIGHT HOUSING MARKETS FAILED TO USE IT AND HAD TO RETURN IT TO THE PHA. IT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT TO THINK BETWEEN A FIFTH AND A THIRD OF FAMILIES WHO ARE GIVEN A VERY DEEP SUBSIDY, WORTH ALMOST $8,000 A YEAR ON AVERAGE, WOULD HAVE TO RETURN IT. USUALLY AFTER HAVING BEEN ON THE WAITING LIST FOR MONTHS, IF NOT YEARS. THAT'S NOT ALL. IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, THE LANDLORDS THAT ARE LEAST LIKELY TO ACCEPT VOUCHERS ARE THOSE WHO HAVE OTHER OPTIONS. THOSE WHO DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THE HASSLE INSPECTIONS, AND THE MARGINAL LANDLORDS TEND TO BE THOSE IN LOW POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS. SO THIS IS AN EXAMPLE FROM THE BALTIMORE CASE. ON THE LEFT IS A POVERTY MAP AND THE RIGHT RACIAL SEGREGATION, NOT SURPRISINGLY COORDINATED IN AND OF THEMSELVES. WE ADD LOCATIONS OF VOUCHER HOLDERS, AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A STRONG LOCATION HERE. THE PLACES WHERE VOUCHER FAMILIES ARE MORE LIKELY TO FIND HOUSING ARE THOSE WITH MORE LEVELS OF HIGHER SEGREGATION AND CONCENTRATED DISADVANTAGE. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF FACTORS THAT COME INTO PLAY LIMITING THE SUCCESS OF THE HCV PROGRAM, WHICH OF WHICH YOU WILL BE HEARING ABOUT TODAY. FIRST OF ALL, THERE ARE BUREAUCRATIC FEATURES THAT CAN LIMIT ITS EFFECTIVENESS. THEY ARE PROVIDED LITTLE SEARCH ASSISTANCE, BARRIERS TO MOVING OUTSIDE THE CITY. SECOND MOBILITY OUTCOMES ARE SHAPED BY TENANT PREFERENCES, AND THIRD, THERE'S SIMPLY A LACK OF AVAILABLE RENTAL HOUSING FULL STUFF IN SOME CITIES, PARTICULARLY IN LOW POVERTY AREAS, BUT WHAT I WANT TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO TODAY IS THE SUPPLY SIDE PREFERENCES. FOUR LANDLORDS CHARGING PRICES THAT WILL QUALIFY THEM TO PARTICIPATE. WHY DON'T THEY? AND ON THE FLIP SIDE, WHAT MAKES THE PROGRAM ATTRACTIVE IN OTHER CONTEXTS. THE THREE RESEARCH SIDES WERE SELECTED TO PROVIDE A RANGE OF HOUSING MARKET CONTEXT. DALLAS REPRESENTS AN UNDERSTUDY METROPOLITAN AREA, AND RAPIDLY SUN BELT CITY, AND HUGE SWABS OF DEVELOPABLE LAND. BALTIMORE AND CLEVELAND ARE SHRINKING RUST BELT CITIES. BOTH SHOW STRONG GROWTH UNTIL THE 1960s FOLLOWED BY DECADES OF POPULATION DECLINE, RACIAL SEGREGATION AND PROPERTY ABANDONMENT. BALTIMORE IS A POOR CITY WITHIN A WEALTHY METROPOLITAN AREA. TODAY CLEVELAND'S POVERTY RATE IS SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER THAN BALTIMORE'S AROUND 36%, WEARED TO 24% IN BALTIMORE AS WELL AS IN DALLAS. IN COLLECTING THE DATA, THE FIRST CHALLENGE WE FACED WAS THAT THERE'S NO EXISTING MASTER LIST OF ALL LANDLORDS. SO IN ORDER TO TRY TO CAPTURE THE RANGE OF TYPES OF LANDLORDS, WE SCRAPED ALL LISTINGS IN EACH CITY, AND WE WANTED TO CAPTURE BOTH LANDLORDS SEEKING VOUCHER TENANTS AS WELL AS THOSE WHO WEREN'T, AND STRATIFIED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD POVERTY RATE AND THE RACIAL PLURALITY OF THE SENSOR TRACK IN WHICH THE LISTING WAS LOCATED. THIS RANDOM SAMPLING PRODUCED 80 ENTRIES OVER THREE YEARS OF DATA COLLECTION. WE AUGMENTED THE INTERVIEWS WITH 40 ADDITIONAL LANDLORDS THAT WE IDENTIFIED AS IMPORTANT PLAYERS IN THE LOCAL HOUSING MARKET. IT CAME TO A TOTAL OF 127 INTERVIEWS. MOST RECENTLY WE ADDED A FOURTH SITE AND ARE CURRENTLY CONDUCTING INTERVIEWS WITH LANDLORDS HERE IN D.C., ALTHOUGH I WON'T DISCUSS THAT TODAY. TO SUPPLEMENT THE INTERVIEW DATA, WE RECEIVED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS FROM HUD THAT INCLUDES ADDRESS DOUBLE DATE ON A VOUCHER FAMILIES IN EACH OF THE METROPOLITAN AREAS, AND IMPORTANTLY WE RECEIVED INFORMATION ABOUT THE LANDLORD AND THE UNIT, AND WE HAVE OVER 1.5 MILLION RECORDS IN TOTAL. I WILL USE THIS DATA A LITTLE BIT TO TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENCES IN THE HOUSING MARKETS ACROSS THE THREE CITIES. FINALLY WE COLLECTED GRAPHIC DATA, OBSERVING LANDLORDS AND HE THEY WENT ABOUT THE DAY TO DAY ROUTINES, AND WE DID RIDE ALONGS WITH SHERIFFS, AND MUCH MORE. SO GETTING ONTO THE FINDINGS. THE FIRST ORDER OF QUESTION IS WHAT TYPE OF LANDLORDS PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM AND HOW DOES LOCAL CONTEXT DRIVE THEM? THIS IS THE TABULATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DATA THAT DISPLAYS THE PERCENTAGE OF TENANTS RENTING IN VARIOUS TYPES OF BUILDINGS AND VARIOUS TYPES OF LANDLORDS ESTIMATED USING THE NUMBER OF VOUCHER SUBSIDIZED UNITS, AND YOU CAN SEE THERE ARE MAJOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SITES. IN CLEVELAND, MIDDLE COLUMN, THE VOUCHER MARKET IS DOMINATED BY LANDLORDS WITH ONLY A FEW UNITS IN THE PORTFOLIO, SMALL RENTAL PROPERTIES AND ALMOST NO BIG GUYS IN THE VOUCHER GAME. IN DALLAS, BY CONTRAST, THE VOUCHER MARKET IS MOSTLY BIG GUYS WITH LARGE LOW RISE APARTMENT COMPLEXES, AND FINALLY BALTIMORE IS A BIT MORE OF A MIX. MOST OF THE STOCK IS SMALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES BUT A THIRD OF THE MARKET CONSISTS OF LARGE FAMILY OWNERS. IN BALTIMORE WE IDENTIFIED ONE GROUP OF LANDLORDS WHO RENT TO VOUCHER HOLDERS WHO WE CALL VOUCHER SPECIALISTS. THESE ARE FOLKS WHOSE ENTIRE BUSINESS MODEL IS SHAPED AROUND THE GROUND PROGRAM AND PROVIDES A DIRECT PATH FOR PROFITABILITY. A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THIS IS AN ORGANIZATION, A COMPANY WE CALLED BROTHERFORD PROPERTIES. THEY BUY A FEW RUNDOWN PROPERTIES AT A TIME, RENOVATE THEM TO PASS INSPECTION, REFINANCE WITH A TRADITIONAL BANK MORTGAGE AND RENT TO A VOUCHER HOLDER. WHY DOES THIS WORK IN BALTIMORE? THE RENT CEILING. HUD LIMITS THE AMOUNT THAT A LANDLORD CAN CHARGE TO ROUND THE METROPOLITAN MEDIAN. THE FMR IS MUCH HIGHER THAN THE CITY AVERAGE AND MUCH, MUCH HIGHER THAN WHAT THEY CAN OFTEN AFFORD TO PAY. FOLKS LIKE RUTHERFORD CAN BUY HOMES, AND CAN OFFER THEM FOR NEAR OR AT THE FMR. INDEED BALTIMORE IS A PLACE WHERE THERE'S ACTIVE COMPETITION OVER VOUCHER HOLDERS. DALLAS ALSO HAS A PROFITABLE MARKET BUT OPERATES DIFFERENTLY FROM BALTIMORE. IN DALLAS THE MARKET IS DOMINATED BY LOW RISE UNITS FROM ACROSS THE COUNTRY. AS I NOTED EARLIER, DALLAS CALCULATES THE FMR ZIP CODE LEVEL, SO THERE'S NO PREMIUM LIKE THERE IS IN BALTIMORE. THEY EMPLOY HIGHLY STANDARD TECHNIQUES THAT ENSURE PROFITABILITY IN DALLAS. THEN THERE'S CLEVELAND. CLEVELAND IS A POOR CITY IN A POOR METRO AREA RELATIVELY SPEAKING. THE FMR IS NOT APPRECIABLY ABOVE MARKET RENTS IN THE CITY. THE ECONOMY IS DEPRESSED, STOCK MOSTLY SMALL UNITS, AND LARGE INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS WE FOUND WANTED NO PART OF THIS SCENE. OBVIOUSLY THERE WERE EXCEPTIONS BUT BY AND LARGE THE VOUCHER PROGRAM DOESN'T REPRESENT A CLEAR BATH TO PROFITABILITY WHICH MEANS IT FALLS TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE, FOLKS LIKE JONATHAN COULDN'T FIND ANY MARKET TENANTS AND FIGURES OUT WHY NOT SECTION 8. THERE ARE COSTS TO THEY. CLEVELAND VOUCHER HOUSING WAS IN SOME OF THE ROUGHEST NEIGHBORHOODS, WORST QUALITY AND LEAST COMPETENTLY MANAGED. THE ONLY CARE THEY OFFER IN THE CITY IS VOUCHER TENANTS NEED HOUSING AND A PORTION OF THE RENT IS GUARANTEED EACH MONTH. SO WE IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF FACTORS THAT LANDLORDS INDICATED ACTED ASSETS MOTIVATION FOR THEM TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM OR DETERRENTS. I WILL SAY TWO THINGS. ONE IS THAT ACROSS ALL SITES, MORE THAN ANY OTHER FACTOR LANDLORDS MENTIONED THAT THE GUARANTEED RENT, AT LEAST THE PORTION THEY RECEIVED FROM THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, WAS A KEY MOTIVATOR FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE VOUCHER PROGRAM. ALSO THE DEGREE TO WHICH LANDLORDS REPORT HIGHER RENTS AS A MOTIVATING FACTOR WAS SOMETHING THAT REALLY DEPENDED ON THE URBAN CONTEXT, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NOTED IN BALTIMORE BUT LESS SO IN THE OTHER SITES. SO TO SUMMARIZE, IN BALTIMORE, THE PROGRAM REPRESENTS THE VERY CLEAR PATH TO PROFITABILITY. IN DALLAS THERE ARE THESE OPPORTUNITIES FOR INSTITUTIONAL INVESTMENT AND LANDLORDS MAKE THE PROGRAM PROFITABLE THROUGH THE EFFICIENCIES OF THE LARGE COMPANIES, AND IN CLEVELAND, THE HVC PROGRAM IS A LAST RESULT FOR LANDLORDS. IN THE FINAL SECTION I WANT TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION WHAT DRIVES NONPARTICIPATION. WHY DO SOME LANDLORDS NOT PARTICIPATE? WHAT OUR DATA SHOW IS THE REMARKABLE DEGREE TO WHICH DIRECT EXPERIENCE WITH THE VOUCHER PROGRAM DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE. FOR NONPARTICIPATING LANDLORDS IN THE SAMPLE WHAT WE FOUND WAS INTERESTINGLY, ALMOST TWO THIRDS OF THEM HAD TRIED RENTING TO VOUCHER HOLDERS IN THE PAST AND HAD BEEN DRIVEN AWAY BY A NEGATIVE EXPERIENCE. >> THESE NEGATIVE EXPERIENCES INVOLVE CONFLICT WITH THE PHA OVER INSPECTIONS OR PERCEIVED TENANT MISBEHAVIOR, AND LANDLORDS CITE AS MOTIVATIONS FOR NOT PARTICIPATING. THESE CATEGORIES ARE NONEXHAUSTIVE AS WELL AS NONEXCLUSIVE. THEY WERE ONLY OCCASIONALLY ABOUT WHAT ACTUALLY NEEDED TO BE REPAIRED. INSTEAD LANDLORDS FOCUSED FRUSTRATION ON WHAT THEY SAW TO BE AN INCONSISTENT AND CAPRICIOUS PROCESS. IT LED TO COSTLY DELAYS, EVENTUALLY PUSHING THEM OUT OF THE PROGRAM. LANDLORDS SEEM TO TAKE IT PERSONALLY WHEN THE PHA PRIORITIZES THE BEST INTEREST OF THE TENANT OVER THEIR OWN IN THEIR PERCEPTION, AND THE CONFLICT SEEMED TO BE AMPLIFIED THEY BELIEVED THE PARTNERSHIP IN THE PHA AND EMBRACED SENSE THEY ARE PROVIDING A SERVICE, IMPLEMENTS OF THE GOVERNMENT PROGRAM AND THEREFORE THEY EXPECT THE PHA TO DEFEND THEIR BUSINESS ABOVE AND BELONG WHAT HUD AND PHA'S ARE POSITIONED TO DO. ANTOINE SAID HIS FIRST VOUCHER TENANT WAS FINE, BUT THE SECOND HAD BECOME A PROBLEM FOR HIM. WHEN IT CAME TIME FOR THE ANNUAL INSPECTION, IT FAILED BECAUSE OF THE DAMAGE ANTOINE FELT THE TENANT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR. HE WAS WELL WITHIN HIS RIGHTS TO TAKE HIM TO COURT. BUT HE NEEDED TO DO THE REPAIRS TO INSURE HEALTH AND SAFETY. HE APPEALED TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY WHO REFUSED, TELLING HIM TO FIX THE UNIT. THE WOMAN LEFT, AND HE THOUGHT NEVER AGAIN. HE ENDED UP GIVING THE PROGRAM ONE MORE SHOT. THIS TIME THE PROBLEM WAS HE FELT HIS TENANTS MOVED TOO OFTEN. TURNOVER IS A COMMON CONCERN FOR LANDLORDS BECAUSE IT'S COSTLY. ANTOINE HAD OPTIONS HERE, BUT BECAUSE HE HAD GIVEN THE PHA A SECOND CHANCE, HE WANTED THEM TO INTERVENE. THEY REFUSED AND THIS TIME HE DROPPED OUT FOR GOOD. WHAT THE STORY SUGGESTS IS NOT NECESSARILY THAT THE PHA SHOULD HAVE INTERVENED IN ANTOINE'S FAVOR, BUT RATHER THAT LANDLORD EDUCATION MIGHT PLAY A ROLE IN HELPING OTHERS LIKE HIM SET UP EXPECTATIONS FOR THE PHA AND ENCOURAGE HIM TO USE THE TOOLS AT HIS DISPOSAL TO DEAL WITH THE SITUATION. FOR EXAMPLE, HE MIGHT HAVE OFFERED A LONGER LEASE TO BEGIN WITH, PROVIDED RENEWAL INCENTIVES OR TALKED TO NEGOTIATE. IN ORDER FOR THE VOUCHER PROGRAM TO SUCCEED, RESEARCHERS AND POLICY MAKERS NEED A BETTER GRASP ON WHAT MOTIVATES LANDLORDS TO PARTICIPATE TO EXPAND THE SUPPLY. HOW CAN WE ATTRACT MORE LANDLORDS TO THE PROGRAM. THERE ARE TWO MAJOR FINDINGS THAT I HAVE COVERED THAT I WANT TO EMPHASIZE HERE. THE FIRST IS THAT LOCAL CONTEXT MATTERS A LOT. NOT ONLY DOES IT SHAPE WHO PROVIDES SUBSIDIZE HOUSING BUT SHAPES OPINIONS. THEY MAKE DECISIONS WHETHER OR NOT TO RENT THROUGH THE PROGRAM BASED ON A HYPOTHETICAL TENANT WHO THEY WOULD OTHERWISE WENT TO IN THE OPEN MARKET. THAT VARIES BY THE CITY THAT YOU ARE STUDYING. THE SECOND POINT IS NONPARTICIPATION IS DRIVEN HEAVILY BY EXPERIENCE. THEY HAVE OFTEN BEEN TURNED OFF BY A NEGATIVE PAST EXPERIENCE. THESE FINDINGS POINT TO THE NEED FOR IMPROVEMENT IN THREE POLICY AREAS. FIRST BUREAUCRATIC STEPS COULD BE MADE MORE EFFICIENT AND SIMPLE IN ORDER TO LESSEN THE BARRIER. SECOND, I THINK PHAS CAN DO A BETTER JOB EDUCATING LANDLORDS TO DEAL WITH PROBLEMS RELATED TO TENANTS. FINALLY, WE BELIEVE THAT THESE CHANGES SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED WITH SOME LEVEL OF SOURCE OF INCOME PROTECTION, WHICH WOULD PROVIDE A LEGAL TOOL TO INCREASE THE SUPPLY OF AVAILABLE UNITS. TOGETHER, WE THINK THESE CHANGES WOULD MAKE THE ATTRACTION OF THE PROGRAM EVEN MORE CLEAR TO LANDLORDS AND WOULD IMPROVE OUTCOMES FOR TENANTS. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] >> THANK YOU, EVERYONE. I KNOW THIS WAS A LOT OF INFORMATION COMING AT YOU. SO I THANK YOU FOR BEING SUCH A GREAT AUDIENCE THUS FAR. NOW IT'S TIME TO TURN TO OUR PANEL DISCUSSION AND CONVERSATION WITH YOU. I DID WANT TO SAY THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE VERY AWARE OF AT HUD IS JUST THIS SORT OF CRITICISM WE GET ALL THE TIME, LIKE HUD IS JUST UP THERE IN THE IVERY TOWER, GIVING REGULATIONS AND FORMS AND PROCESSES AND RED TAPE, AND IT'S JUST TOO MUCH, RIGHT? AND THIS IS PART OF OUR CHARGE AND WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY IS TO CONDITION TO YOU. SECRETARY CARSON ACTUALLY SAT US DOWN, TODD AND MYSELF AND SAID PART OF WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS ELIMINATE THIS RED TAPE AND GET TO A BETTER PLACE WITH THE PROGRAM SO THAT IT IS MORE ATTRACTIVE. NOBODY HAS EVER ACTUALLY CALLED THE HUD BUILDING THE IVERY TOWER BY THE WAY. WE HAVE HAD STEVEN DURHAM COME ON BOARD. STEVEN HAS SPENT OVER 15 YEARS RUNNING VOUCHER PROGRAMS ON THE GROUND IN LA, AT MIAMI DADE, AND MOST RECENTLY IN BRIDGEPORT AND THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND HE'S GOING TO COME UP AND MODERATE THE PANEL AND FACILITATE THE DISCUSSION. I WILL TURN IT OVER TO STEVEN. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. THANK YOU, DANIELLE FOR THE INTRODUCTION THERE. MANY OF YOU GUYS ARE WONDERING WHEN ARE WE GETTING TO THE LANDLORD SECTION? I KNOW THEY ARE READY TO VOICE THEIR OPINION. WE WANTED TO HAVE A QUICK DISCUSSION WITH THE PANEL TO SET THE TABLE FOR THAT DISCUSSION, BECAUSE WE WANTED TO HAVE INSIGHT FROM THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ACTUALLY PARTICIPATING IN THIS PROGRAM. WE ARE GOING TO BRING THE TWO RESEARCHERS UP. MARY WILL JOIN US AND DARRELL CARTER WHO WE INTRODUCED EARLIER. MR. CARTER IS THE FOUNDER, CHAIRMAN AND CEO OF CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, AND IT'S A CALIFORNIA BASED INVESTMENT FIRM AND OPERATES APARTMENT PROPERTIES THAT ARE AFFORDABLE AND WORKABLE COMMUNITIES. MR. CARTER HAS 37 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THIS COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY. THEY OPERATE PROPERTIES IN 16 STATES, 9,000 UNITS, EXCUSE ME. WE ARE ALSO GOING TO BRING TO THE STAGE RONALD MCCOY. RONALD MCCOY HAS 18 YEARS OF HOUSING EXPERIENCE. FOR THE PAST 9 YEARS HE HEADED THE D.C. HOUSING CHOICE PROGRAM. HE'S GROWN THE BUSINESS BY APPROXIMATELY 7,000 FAMILIES, GREAT WORK. THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND D.C. HOUSING AUTHORITY SERVING MORE THAN 20,000 FAMILIES IN THE DISTRICT, 4,000 SUPPORTED BY LOCAL FUNDS, AND D.C., THANK YOU FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE NEED AS WELL. WE ARE GOING TO SIT DOWN, AND TALK A LITTLE BIT I HAVE GAVE YOU A LOT OF INFORMATION. YOU GUYS SHOULD KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE RENTAL MARKETS, AND YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT LANDLORDS. WE ARE GOING TO TALK MORE ABOUT IT FROM THE PRACTICAL SIDE, AND A PERSONAL NOTE LIVING OUT A DREAM HERE AS A LITTLE KID, I WAS FOND OF PHIL DONAHUE, GETTING MODERATED DISCUSSION. I WISH I COULD BE UP HERE AS HE WAS AND GET THE MICROPHONE AND POINT IT AT PEOPLE. ALSO, THE SLIDE, PLEASE, LOG ON IF YOU ARE NOT ON THE WI FI, LEASE LOG ON, BECAUSE WHAT WE WANT IS TO HEAR FROM YOU. THIS SESSION IS TO HEAR FROM YOU TO LET YOU KNOW WHAT WE CAN DO TO IMPROVE THE PROGRAM. WHAT THE APP IS GOING TO DO IS ASK YOU A SERIES OF QUESTIONS, AND PLEASE USE SHORT ANSWERS, ONE TO TWO WORDS, AND BASED POSITIVE THE WORDS, IT WILL STEER SOME OF THE CONVERSATION WE ARE HAVING. LANDLORDS THAT HAVE THINGS TO SAY, REFRAIN FROM UNFLATTERING WORDS, AND WE APPRECIATE THE COLORFUL LANGUAGE, BUT LET'S KEEP IT NICE TODAY. OKAY. SO WE ARE GOING TO JUMP INTO THE PANEL. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. >> ALL RIGHT. WHAT WE HEARD ABOUT WAS A LOT OF ISSUES ABOUT PERCEPTION, THE PERCEPTION OF THE PROGRAM VERSUS THE REALITY OF THE PROGRAM. WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE THAT ARE ROUNDED IN THE REALITIES OF THE PROGRAM. THEY DEAL WITH IT ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. I WANT TO LEAD OFF WITH THE QUESTION ASKING MR. CARTER AND MR. MCCOY IS WHAT IS YOUR EXPECTATION OF HCV LANDLORD, MR. MCCOY? >> THE EXPECTATION IS FOR THE LANDLORD TO AND BE THE LEASE ENFORCER, TO NO DIFFERENT THAN THEY WOULD ANY OF THEIR MARKET TENANTS TO TREAT OUR VOUCHER CLIENTS THAT RESIDE IN THE UNITS EXACTLY THE SAME AND ENFORCE THEIR LEASE. >> ESSENTIALLY THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A VOUCHER TENANT AND A LANDLORD IS NO DIFFERENT THAN THE PRIVATE MARKET, CORRECT? >> YES. >> ALL WE ARE ASKING AS A PHA IS THAT YOU TREAT YOUR TENANTS THE SAME. >> YES. >> MR. CARTER, AS A LANDLORD, WHAT DO YOU FEEL YOUR ROLE IS AS AN HCV LANDLORD. >> MY ROLE AS A LANDLORD, THE FIRST THING IS TO MAKE SURE THAT MY TENANTS HAVE A QUALITY HOME TO LIVE IN. THAT'S MY FIRST PRIORITY. THE SECOND IS THAT WE WORK WE VIEW OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR HOUSING AUTHORITIES AS PARTNERS, AND WE ARE IN 16 STATES, AND I GOT THE TALLY, WE INTERACT WITH 46 DIFFERENT HOUSING AUTHORITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY. ONE OF OUR PRACTICES AS A COMPANY IS THAT WE INTERACT WITH THE HOUSING AGENCIES AT ALL LEVELS, WHICH STARTS WITH ME, OUR ON SITE MANAGERS, CONAPPLIANCE PEOPLE. WE ARE IN THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUSINESS. WE WILL HIT 10,000 APARTMENTS THIS YEAR, AND ABOUT 40% ARE EITHER VOUCHER HOLDERS OR PROJECT BASE SECTION 8. SO WHY DO WE DO IT? BECAUSE WE FIND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE VERY, VERY GOOD RESIDENTS AND SOME HAVE HOW MUCHERS AND SOME DON'T. SO, YOU KNOW, THE FACT IS THERE'S A NEED FOR QUALITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND LAST YEAR WE DID AS A PORTFOLIO ABOUT 98 1/2% OCCUPANCY. SO THAT'S WHY WE DO IT. >> THANK. WE APPRECIATE IT. WHAT IS YOUR EXPECTATION OF THE PHA? >> YOU KNOW, WE DEAL WITH 46 OF THEM. I CAN TELL YOU I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THAT THEY UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THAT WE ARE FOCUSED ON THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE RESIDENTS THEY REFER US, AND THAT IT'S A PARTNERSHIP, AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. JUST WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE AN EMPTY APARTMENT AND IF IT TAKES TWO WEEKS TO INSPECT IT THAT THAT'S TWO WEEKS OF REVENUE THAT WE DON'T GET, AND THERE'S A FAMILY SOMEWHERE THAT'S PROBABLY IN A LESSER SITUATION THAT DOESN'T HAVE A HOME, SO YOU KNOW, WE HAVE FIVE OR SIX THAT ARE EXEMPLARY, AND GENERALLY SPEAKING THEY DO INSPECTIONS IN 72 HOURS OR LESS. SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S ONE ISSUE IS THE INSPECTIONS. THE OTHER IS THAT MANY OF THE PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITIES HAVE INVESTED IN TECHNOLOGY WHICH ENABLES THE PROCESS THAT WE CAN INTERACT IN AN EFFICIENT WAY. BUT THEN WE HAVE SOME THAT EVERYTHING IS STILL PAPER, AND MESSAGING FILES OVER AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> YOU MENTIONED THAT DIFFERENT PHA'S, DIFFERENT BUSINESS PRACTICES, AND SOME ARE MORE SAVVY THAN OTHERS. IN SPECIFIC RESEARCH WE FOUND LANDLORDS FEEL THERE'S OVERLY BUREAUCRATIC PROCESS, OVERLY BURDENSOME PROCESSES FOR THE TWO RESEARCHERS AT THE TABLE. TELL US ABOUT SOME OF THE BURDENS THAT PEOPLE DISCUSSED IN THEIR RESEARCH OR IN YOUR RESEARCH. >> YEAH, AND HOPEFULLY WE WILL HEAR FROM FOLKS IN THE ROOM LATER ON, BUT CERTAINLY WE HAD LANDLORDS REPORTING THAT INSPECTIONS WERE BURDENSOME, THAT THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT, THAT THEY COULDN'T PREPARE FOR THEM BECAUSE OF THAT, AND WE SEE BIG VARIATIONS IN THAT BY CITY AS WELL. SO IF YOU LOOK AT CLEVELAND, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH HAS A MUCH OLDER HOUSING STOCK, IT'S ACTUALLY HARDER TO KEEP UP, AND THEY FIND INSPECTIONS QUITE A BIT MORE BURDENSOME THAN FOLKS IN DALLAS THAT WERE EASIER TO READY FOR INSPECTIONS, AND YOU KNOW, WE WANT HOMES TO BE INSPECTED AND WE WANT THEM TO PASS INSPECTIONS, AND THIS IS A KEY PART OF PROVIDING SAFE HOUSING TO FAMILIES, AND TO THE DEGREE THAT WE CAN BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THE EXPECTATIONS ARE FOR THOSE INSPECTIONS, I THINK LANDLORDS WILL HAVE AN EASIER TIME MEETING THEM. >> OKAY. SPEAKING ABOUT HQS INSPECTIONS, IN YOUR OPINION, IS THE PROCESS A LITTLE OVERLY BURDENSOME? TELL US ABOUT THE PROCESS. >> AGAIN, IT VARIES PER HOUSING AUTHORITY. I MUST JUST TAKE ONE MOMENT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND THANK SECRETARY CARSON FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. THERE WAS A GROUP OF LANDLORDS SIX WEEKS AGO, CINDY, THAT ORGANIZED BY THE NATIONAL MULTIFAMILY HOUSING COUNCIL. WE MET WITH SECRETARY CARSON TO TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS ISSUE. I MUST TELL YOU THAT I WAS ACTUALLY AMAZED I HAD TAKEN A GUESS AND FIGURE THAT THERE WERE 50 STATES, SO MAYBE YOU HAVE 50 TO 100, YOU KNOW 50, MAYBE 100 HOUSING AUTHORITIES IN EACH STATE. MAYBE YOU HAD 500 HOUSING AUTHORITIES, AND THE NUMBER WE HEARD WAS 3600, AND I'M LIKE WOW. HOW IN THE HECK CAN YOU EVER HAVE THAT MANY HOUSING AUTHORITIES. I KNOW THAT'S ONE OF THE CHALLENGES, AND IT AMAZED ME THAT AS AN ORGANIZATION THAT HUD HAS TO INTERACT WITH THAT MANY HOUSING AGENCIES. >> YEAH. >> THAT'S GOT TO BE HARD FOR YOU. I WAS GOING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT IT. YOU CAN COMPLAIN TO ME. >> IT'S A BREEZE. I WAKE UP EVERY DAY AND GO HOME, DID NOTHING. BUT IT'S A BIG JOB. IT'S A BIG PROGRAM, BUT IT'S A NEEDED PROGRAM. WE DO HAVE THOSE 3,000 PARTNERS OUT THERE, BECAUSE THEY ARE PARTNERS, AND DELIVERING THE ESSENTIAL SERVICE TO THE PEOPLE THAT WE ARE TASKED WITH SERVING, AND WE WANT TO MAKE THE PROCESS AS EASY AS POSSIBLE TO ENTICE THE LANDLORDS, AND I TURNED TO RON HERE AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PHA, AND TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING TO RECRUIT LANDLORDS, AND ALSO TO INSURE LANDLORDS THAT THEIR EXPERIENCE WITH THE PROGRAM IS GOING TO BE GOOD. >> WE HAVE CREATED SOMETHING CALLED THE HOUSING AFFORDABLE LIVING OPTIONS HALO. IT'S A PARALLEL APPROACH TO DO OUTREACH TO OWNERS WHO TYPICALLY WOULD NOT HAVE UNITS IN THE PROGRAM, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THEY ARE IN THE LOW POVERTY AREAS WHERE THE RENTS ARE SO HIGH. BUT IT'S ALSO TARGETED TO WORKING WITH OUR PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS TO GET THEM READY TO BE GOOD TENANTS. WHAT THAT MEANS IS WE WORK WITH THEM WITH RESPECT TO TRAINING THEM ON BASIC HOUSEKEEPING SKILLS, BASICALLY HOW TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR, FINANCIAL BUDGETING. EDUCATING THEM ABOUT WHAT IS AVAILABLE TO THEM IN THOSE LOW POVERTY AREAS THAT THEY WANT TO MOVE TO. THE PARALLEL APPROACH IS THE OUTREACH THAT WE DO FOR THE LANDLORDS WITHIN THOSE COMMUNITIES WHO MAY HAVE THOSE STEREOTYPES THAT I DON'T WANT TO RENT BECAUSE OF X, Y AND Z. WHERE OUR PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS WHO GO THROUGH THE HALO PROGRAM GRADUATE AND WALK AWAY WITH A CERTIFICATE SAYING I HAVE OBTAINED THE TRAINING FROM THE HOUSING TRAINING AND MAKES THEMSELF MORE MARKETABLE WITH THE MARKET TENANTS, I CAN PAY THE RENT. ON TOP OF THAT, WE HAVE A SERIES OF QUARTERLY LANDLORD TRAINING. WE FOUND THAT'S VERY BENEFICIAL TO DO SOME OUTREACH TO OUR LANDLORDS TO EDUCATE THEM ABOUT HOW THE PROGRAM ACTUALLY WORKS. WE DON'T SELL OUT BECAUSE IT'S FREE, BUT WE DO, EVERY TIME WE POST IT, THE SLOTS FILL UP QUICKLY, AND WHAT THAT DOES IS WORKING WITH OUR ASSOCIATION, IT'S COMPRISED OF 3 OR 400 LANDLORDS WITHIN THE DISTRICT. DOING AN EDUCATION OUTREACH, HEARING THE LANDLORDS AND WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE AND BEING A GOOD PARTNER WITH THEM, IT ACTUALLY SHAPES SOMETIMES, NOT OUT OF THE POLICIES WE CREATED WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY BUT SOME OF OUR PROCEDURES AND PRACTICES THAT IMPACT OUR ABILITY TO WORK CLOSELY WITH THE LANDLORDS AND ULTIMATELY HAVE THE FAMILIES TO MOVE INTO THOSE UNITS, AND BE STABILIZED NOT TO MOVE SO MUCH. >> THE HALO PROGRAM THAT YOU REFERENCED, YOUR AGENCY IS WHAT WE CALL THE N TWA, MOVING TO WORK AGENCY THAT HAS ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITIES THAT ARE AFFORDED TO OUR TRADITIONAL HCV PROGRAMS. DO YOU KNOW OTHER PHA'S THAT HAVE SIMILAR TYPES OF PROGRAMS THAT ARE DOING THESE TYPES OF THINGS TO MAKE LANDLORDS MORE COMFORTABLE? >> I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY. I KNOW THROUGHOUT THE YEARS WE HAVE CREATED THIS MODEL, BUT YOU ARE RIGHT. WE USED OUR NTW FLEXIBILITY TO PRODUCE TO MAKE OUR PROCESSES MORE EFFICIENT SO WE CAN BETTER UTILIZE THE STAFF TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS. WE ALSO DEVELOPED A ROBUST MOBILITY COUNSELING PROGRAM THAT ACTUALLY HELPS OUR FAMILIES TO DO THEIR UNIT SEARCHES, AND THAT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL, AND ON TOP OF THAT, THE NTW FLEXIBILITY, WE CREATED A MEDIATION COMPONENT OF THE VOUCHER PROGRAM. WHAT THAT'S DESTINED TO DO, YOU HAVE LANDLORDS AND YOU HAVE PARTICIPANTS THAT ARE IN CONFLICT THAT CAN'T SEEM TO WORK IT OUT, AND IT'S EXPENSIVE FOR LANDLORDS TO GO THROUGH THE EVICTION PROCESS, AND WE DON'T WANT THE PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS TO BE EVICTED. THEY CAN DO OUTREACH TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY. WE WILL SIT DOWN WITH BOTH PARTIES, AND SOMETIMES WE ARE ABLE TO WORK IT OUT BETWEEN THE TWO, AND SOMETIMES IT'S BEST WE LOOK TO HELP THAT FAMILY FIND ANOTHER UNIT AND WORK WITH THAT LANDLORD. >> OKAY. THIS IS FOR EVERYBODY. WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS IT TO SCREEN A TENANT TO ENSURE THAT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TENANT AND THE LANDLORD IS GOING TO BE A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE, AND SO I WILL PUT IT TO THE GROUP. I THINK EVERYBODY IS FAMILIAR WITH THE TENANT, AND WE ARE TRYING TO DECIDE WHO IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING A GOOD TENANT IS IN THEIR UNIT? >> IT'S THE LANDLORD. WE SCREEN, AND WE SCREEN, YOU KNOW, ALL THE TYPICAL CREDIT THINGS. ALSO, WE WANT GOOD RESIDENTS. YOU KNOW, IT'S IMPORTANT. CHARACTER IS IMPORTANT AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS, AND YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO SAY I DON'T WANT A SECTION 8 RESIDENT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE THEY WILL BE DISRUPTIVE. I DON'T GET THAT. I MEAN, I LOOK AT OUR EXPERIENCE AND FIRST WE HAVE TO BE GOOD LANDLORDS. THAT TO ME IS WHERE IT STARTS. WHEN PEOPLE MOVE IN, YOU KNOW, THERE HAS TO BE AN EXPECTATION THAT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THEY ARE GOING TO PAY THE RENT, AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE DISRUPTIVE, AND WE ARE GOING TO PROVIDE THE BEST HOUSING PRODUCT AND SERVICE TO THEM THAT WE CAN, WHICH MEANS THAT WE HAVE AN EXPECTATION IN OUR COMPANY THAT, YOU KNOW, ANY MAINTENANCE REQUESTS, A, THAT THE RESIDENT IS CONTACTED WITHIN 12 HOURS AND B, THAT THE MAINTENANCE ISSUE IS ADDRESSED IN 24 HOURS, AND THAT IS OUR STANDARD. VERY OFTEN WE EXCEED THAT STANDARD, AND I THINK THAT THAT RELATIONSHIP IS ABOUT TRUST. YOU KNOW, SO MANY TIMES, YOU KNOW, WE TRY NOT TO BE IN AN ADVERSARIAL SITUATION. WE TELL OUR RESIDENTS, THIS IS YOUR HOME. WE ARE JUST MANAGING YOUR HOME, AND I DO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE STARTED THIS COMPANY TO ADDRESS THE LOWER END OF THE HOUSING MARKET. OUR RESIDENTS MAKE BETWEEN 30 AND $70,000 A YEAR, AND WE ARE IN VERY HIGH COST MARKETS, AND THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE AS WELL, THAT IF WE ARE IN NEW YORK CITY, AND WE ARE IN LOS ANGELES, WE ARE IN SEATTLE, AND WE ARE IN THE BAY AREA. MANY PEOPLE WAIT 7 TO 10 YEARS TO GET A VOUCHER, AND IT IS HIGHLY VALUED IN THOSE MARKETS, BECAUSE THEY ARE REALLY EXPENSIVE. SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE FOUND THAT THE DEFAULT RATE AMONG VOUCHER HOLDERS IS ACTUALLY LESS THAN OUR OTHER RESIDENTS, AND JUST TO GIVE YOU A SENSE, OUR DEFAULT RATE LAST YEAR ON ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS WAS ABOUT 35 BASIS POINTS, AND OUR VOUCHER RESIDENTS WERE SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN THAT. >> THANK YOU. TRYING TO GET A QUESTION THAT'S GOING TO SPARK GOOD DIALOGUE HERE. WE TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT TYPES OF LANDLORDS THAT HAVE DIFFERENT INTERESTS IN EITHER STUDY IN TERMS OF WHY THEY ARE ACTUALLY DOING THE PROGRAM. LANDLORDS THAT HAD THE BAD EXPERIENCE, WHAT BROUGHT THEM BACK TO THE PROGRAM FOR THOSE THAT CAME BACK? >> SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHO HAD A NEGATIVE EXPERIENCE, THOSE ARE OTHER LANDLORDS WHO ARE NO LONGER PARTICIPATING. I THINK WE SAW THE CASE OF ANTOINE, AND I THINK THERE ARE PLENTY OF PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO ARE WILLING TO GIVE IT A SHOT, RIGHT? BUT THE BIGGEST MOTIVATING FACTOR THAT WE SAW ACROSS THE BOARD WAS THE GUARANTEED RENT. SO FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE HAVING EXPERIENCES WITH LOW INCOME TENANTS THAT CAN'T ALWAYS PAY THEIR RENTS ON TIME, IT CERTAINLY IS MOTIVATING TO KNOW YOU WILL GET A BIG PORTION OF THAT RENT EVERY MONTH FROM THE HOUSING AUTHORITY. >> THE OTHER THING THAT GOES A LONG WAY OFTEN IS THE HOUSING AUTHORITY. IF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY IS WELL MANAGED AND SENDING IN THE CHECKS ON TIME, AND MEDIATING, AS MR. MCCOY IS TALKING ABOUT, ALL THESE SPECIAL EXTRA SERVICES THAT YOU ARE REALLY PROVIDING, WHICH NOT ALL HOUSING AUTHORITIES HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO, BECAUSE IT DOES COST MONEY, I THINK THAT CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR LANDLORDS AS WELL. WE HEARD IN OUR STUDY THEY ACCEPT VOUCHERS FROM SOME LANDLORD AUTHORITIES BUT NOT OTHERS. I THINK HOW THE HOUSING AUTHORITIES MANAGE, THEIR WILLINGNESS TO MEDIATE OFFER EXTRA ASSISTANCE TO BE THERE WHEN THERE'S A CHALLENGE REALLY DOES MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. I HEARD YOU SAY THAT AS WELL. >> I ALSO THINK HOUSING AUTHORITIES AREN'T PERFECT. >> YEP. >> ACCOUNTABILITY IS BIG. SO WE KNOW WE ARE NOT PERFECT, BUT WE ARE STRIVING FOR THAT PERFECTION FOR OUR PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS THAT WE SERVE. SO WORKING CLOSELY AND HAVING GOOD DIALOGUE WITH BOTH OUR MOM AND POP AND OUR LARGER LANDLORDS IS CRITICAL TO OUR SUCCESS. SO THEIR FEEDBACK TO US, AGAIN, WITH OUR POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND THINGS THAT WE ARE DOING IS CRITICAL FOR OUR ABILITY NOTWITHSTANDING THINGS WE CREATED BUT JUST TO BE ABLE TO SUSTAIN WHAT WE HAVE NOW. WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO BUILD THE BRIDGES WITH LANDLORDS SO WE CAN HAVE THE EFFECTIVE DIALOGUE. >> YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT WONDER WHY AREN'T LARGER, MORE LARGER LANDLORDS IN THE PROGRAM, AND ONE OF TALKING TO PEOPLE WHO, YOU KNOW, COMPETITORS IN THE INDUSTRY, YOU KNOW, WE BUILT OUR COMPANY AROUND THE AFFORDABLE INDUSTRY. SO IN ADDITION TO VOUCHER RESIDENTS, WE OWN TAX CREDIT PROPERTIES. I MENTIONED WE HAVE 46 REGULATORY OR HOUSING AUTHORITIES THAT WE DEAL WITH, BUT IF YOU ADD STATE HOUSING FINANCIAL AGENCIES, TAX CREDIT AUTHORITIES, WE HAVE ANOTHER 60. WE HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE WHO JUST WORK IN OUR COMPLIANCE AREA, WHO MANAGE, YOU KNOW, DAY TO DAY, EVERY ONE OF THOSE REGULATORY AGREEMENTS, AND THAT'S DIFFICULT IF YOU HAVE AN OWNER WHO, SAY THEY OWN, YOU KNOW, 10,000 APARTMENTS AND MAYBE THEY -- 5% 500 APARTMENTS TO TRY TO INTERACT WITH A HOUSING AUTHORITY WHEN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT THE SUPPORT AND WE'VE BUILT AROUND THAT. IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS A BEST PRACTICE -- HAVE A PERSON DEDICATED TO INTERACTING WITH THE VARIOUS HOUSING AGENCIES BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE FIND THAT MEETING FACE-TO-FACE WITH THE AGENCY IS ALWAYS PRODUCTIVE. THEY UNDERSTAND US AND, AGAIN, TRYING TO TREAT IT AS A PARTNERSHIP. >> I CONCUR. >> LET'S TALK ABOUT INCENTIVES, HOW DO WE GET MORE LANDLORDS TO SAY YES? WHAT ARE YOU GUYS DOING TO INCENTIVIZE LANDLORDS? >> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE, USING OUR MTW FLEXIBILITY, WHICH I THINK IS AN OPTION TO ALL PHAS, WHERE YOU HAVE TWO CONSISTENT YEARS OF UNITS THAT HAVE PASSED INSPECTION, WE NOW WILL PUT YOU IN THE CATEGORY WHERE WE DO EVERY OTHER YEAR INSPECTIONS. AND WE HAVE SEVERAL THOUSAND OF OUR UNITS IN THE PROGRAM WHERE WE DO EVERY OTHER YEAR INSPECTIONS, AND IT'S A GOOD THING IN THAT IT'S LESS INTRUSIVE TO OUR PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS WHO MAINTAIN THEIR UNITS AS WELL AS BURDENSOME ON LANDLORDS. WE'VE DESIGNED HERE IN THE DISTRICT, SORT OF UNIQUE THE WAY WE DO OUR REASONABLENESS, WE DO THEM BY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THERE'S 50 OR SO NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE DISTRICT, AND WE DO A TEST BY NEIGHBORHOOD AND SET UP TO OUR PAYMENT STANDARDS BY NEIGHBORHOODS SO WE CAN BEST REFLECT WHAT'S HAPPENING WITHIN THAT COMMUNITY TO KEEP PACE. BUT WE CAN'T GET INTO ALL NEIGHBORHOODS, SO WE TRY TO, AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, KEEP PACE WITH THE MARKET AND THE RENTS, AND THAT ALLOWS OUR LANDLORDS TO BE RECRUITED INTO THE PATROL AS WELL AS TO STAY INTO THE PROGRAM. >> CAN I JUST UNDERSCORE THAT, BECAUSE IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HEAR FROM LANDLORDS, WHICH IS THE BOTTOM LINE, RIGHT? SET THE RENTS COMPETITIVELY. AND WE DID SEE LOWER REJECTION RATES IN DC, AND THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON AND WE CAN'T -- WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WAS DRIVING THOSE OUT COSTLY, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD BASED RENTS MAKE A DIFFERENCE. >> YOU KNOW, THE OTHER THING THAT WOULD BE GREAT, THAT IF YOU HAVE A TRACK RECORD WITH A -- THERE ARE A LOT OF GOOD LANDLORDS THAT TAKE -- A LOT OF GOOD COMPANIES, AND WE CERTAINLY KNOW OF OTHERS FELT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE INCENTIVES WHEN YOU THINK OF LIKE PRECHECK IF YOU TRAVEL A LOT OR THE CLEAR LINE THAT YOU CAN GO INTO THAT MAYBE YOU PROVIDE INCENTIVES FOR THOSE LANDLORDS THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, BEEN PRODUCTIVE, AND -- OR WHO ARE, YOU KNOW, PERFORMING VERY, VERY WELL. AND I THINK THAT WOULD INDUCE MORE OWNERS TO PARTICIPATE. >> ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE DO, AND PARTICULARLY WITH OUR HALO PROGRAM, IS, WHEN A FAMILY WHO WAS INTO A UNIT WITH A LANDLORD IN ONE OF THE LOW POVERTY AREAS, WE DO QUARTERLY VISITS, FOR THAT VERY FIRST YEAR, WE'LL CHECK UP ON BOTH OUR PROGRAM PARTICIPANT AND THE LANDLORD TO MAKE SURE THE RELATIONSHIP WORKS. THUS FAR WE'VE NOT HAD ONE FAMILY THAT'S MOVED WITH HALO THAT HAS ACTUALLY MOVED ANYWHERE. THEY'VE BEEN THERE SINCE. AND WE HAVE MORE THAN A HUNDRED. >> OKAY. LAST QUESTION BEFORE I ASK THE AUDIENCE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS -- >> [INAUDIBLE] [ LAUGHTER ] >> INTERACTIVE POLL. >> THIS IS THE POLL, SO THE TECHNOLOGY DOES WORK. >> THE LIGHT IS KILLING ME UP HERE, I'M VERY HOT, BUT APPARENTLY SOMEBODY -- EVERYBODY HAD COFFEE, YOU KNOW, SO BUY STOCK IN COFFEE. ANYWAYS, I WANTED TO END MY SET OF QUESTIONS BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO THE AUDIENCE. IS THE PERCEPTION OF THE PROGRAM, DOES IT MATCH THE REALITY? >> NO. AND I THINK PART OF THE PERCEPTION, AND WE TALK ABOUT OWNERS AND LANDLORDS, BUT ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS, WE INVEST INSTITUTIONAL CAPITAL SO WE'RE OUT RAISING CAPITAL FROM LARGE PENSION FUNDS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES AND BANKS. AND CANDIDLY, A LOT OF THE PERCEPTION IS ON THE CAPITAL SIDE OF IT, WHEN YOU SAY, WELL, WE OWN SECTION 8 -- WE HAVE SECTION 8 RESIDENTS, AND THEY'LL SAY, IF I COME OUTSIDE AND VISIT, WILL I GET SHOT, AND I'M LIKE PROBABLY NOT, BUT THE PERCEPTIONS COME FROM THAT. >> PROBABLY. >> YEAH, PROBABLY -- WELL, I DON'T KNOW -- >> MOST DEFINITELY. >> I SAY I DON'T KNOW WHO'S AFTER YOU, BUT IF IT'S REGARDING ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS, THE ANSWER IS PROBABLY NO, OR IT IS GOING TO BE NO, BUT I DO THINK PEOPLE HAVE A PERCEPTION, AND, YOU KNOW, I MUST SAY THAT PART OF OUR BUSINESS, I MEAN, WE DEAL WITH THAT THIRD RAIL TOPIC OF RACE. AND THE REALITY IS THAT MORE THAN HALF OF OUR COMMUNITIES THAT WE SERVE ARE IN COMMUNITIES OF COLOR, AND THERE ARE PERCEPTIONS THAT INVESTORS HAVE IN INVESTING IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT, TO ME, IS A GREATER ISSUE THAN THE -- IT'S TIED TO THE ISSUE WITH THE VOUCHER, AND IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO AND HAVE SOME LEVEL OF SUCCESS IS CONVINCING INVESTORS THAT THEY'RE GOOD RESIDENTS IN THOSE COMMUNITIES OF COLOR. BUT I DO THINK IT STARTS WITH THE CAPITAL BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, IN MANY OF THE -- YOU TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, CLEVELAND. ONE OF THE REASONS THAT'S A CHALLENGE IS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, NO ONE WANTS TO INVEST IN CLEVELAND. PEOPLE WANT TO INVEST IN BALTIMORE. THEY WANT TO INVEST IN DALLAS. BUT FEWER PEOPLE WANT TO INVEST IN CLEVELAND BECAUSE OF PERCEPTION. >> RON? PERCEPTION VERSUS REALITY? >> IT DOESN'T MATCH. AND IT -- ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO WHEN WE'RE OUT, WE'RE PROACTIVE AND WE'LL GO OUT INTO THE COMMUNITIES. WE WILL ACTUALLY HAVE VOUCHER PARTICIPANTS TO ACTUALLY DO THE MARKETING OF THE VOUCHER PROGRAM INSTEAD OF HAVING THE -- US AS THE GOVERNMENT SAYING, THIS IS SUCH A GREAT THING, THAT YOU WANT TO HEAR DIRECTLY FROM THE FAMILIES THEMSELVES, AND HEAR THEIR STORIES AND HEAR THEIR STRUGGLES, BUT LOOK AT WHERE THEY ARE NOW AND THEY ARE NO DIFFERENT THAN ANYONE ELSE. AND, HONESTLY, IF THE PHA HAS A ROLE IN BEING PROACTIVE IN MARKETING THE VOUCHER PROGRAM TO DISPEL THOSE PERCEPTIONS. THEY HAVE AN ABSOLUTE RESPONSIBILITY TO DO WHAT THEY CAN WITHIN THEIR MEANS TO HELP OUR PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS TO BE SUCCESSFUL. AND A LOT OF THAT IS DISPELLING THOSE MYTHS. >> AT THIS POINT WE'D LIKE TO OPEN UP QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR, IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE PANEL. IF SO, PLEASE STEP TO THE MICROPHONE. YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS OF ANYBODY ABOUT THE RESEARCH, QUESTIONS TO OUR RESIDENT LANDLORD OR TO MR. MCCOY ABOUT SOME OF THE PHA PRACTICES. OPEN MIC. >> DON'T BE SHY. DON'T BE BASHFUL. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I WORK FOR LOCAL OWNER AND DEVELOPER, VICTORY HOUSING. THE RESEARCHER MENTIONED THAT SETTING COMPETITIVE PRICING IS VERY IMPORTANT, AND PRIVATE MARKET IS DOING THE ECONOMIC PRICING WHERE THE PRICES OF APARTMENTS, THEY CHANGE EVERY DAY, EVERY HOUR, LIKE AIRLINE PRICING. SO THE QUESTION TO HUD REPRESENTATIVE IS WHETHER THERE WAS A THOUGHT OF LOOKING AT PAYMENT STANDARDS MORE THAN ONCE A YEAR. >> REPEAT THE QUESTION? ABOUT A WHAT? >> WHETHER YOU THOUGHT ABOUT CHANGING THE PAYMENT STANDARDS MORE THAN ONCE A YEAR TO KEEP UP WITH THE COMPETITIVE PRICING. >> I THINK -- NO, I DON'T THINK THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED AT THIS POINT IN TIME. SETTING THE PAYMENT STANDARDS IS A LOCAL JURISDICTION DECISION, EVALUATING FMRS ARE DONE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. THE RESEARCH AND THE TIME THAT IT TAKES TO GET THAT DONE PROBABLY -- WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR US TO SET UP FMRS MORE THAN ONE TIME DURING THE YEAR. BUT WE DO LEAVE IT TO THE LOCAL PHA. MR. MCCOY COULD PROBABLY TALK ABOUT HOW DC HAS DECIDED TO USE THEIR PAYMENT STANDARDS. >> WHAT WE'VE DONE IS, WE DO ANALYSIS FROM FIRST QUARTER OF EACH FISCAL YEAR, A COMPLETE MARKET ANALYSIS OF EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD, AND AT THE START OF THE CALENDAR YEAR, WE SET THOSE RENTS WITH OR WITHOUT UTILITIES, BY NEIGHBORHOOD. AND SO IT'S VERY TRANSPARENT AND CLEAR WHAT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY WILL PAY UP TO BY BEDROOM SIZES, BY NEIGHBORHOOD, IT'S ACTUALLY PUBLISHED ON OUR WEBSITE. SO IT LENDS ITSELF TO BEING TRANSPARENT, LANDLORDS CAN MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS RIGHT AWAY, BUT WHERE WE GET CHALLENGED, WHERE WE THINK THE LANDLORDS BELIEVE THAT THOSE RENTS ARE TOO LOW, WE WELCOME THE LANDLORDS TO PROVIDE US COMPARABLES. AND IF THOSE COMPARABLES DETERMINE THAT THERE'S A SHIFT WITHIN THAT MARKET A BEDROOM SIZE OF 10% OR MORE, WE ADJUST. SIMPLY BECAUSE WE'VE SAID IT DOESN'T MEAN WE'LL NOT LOOK TO UNDERSTAND THAT IN SOME NEIGHBORHOODS, FOR US, THAT THE MARKET WOULD CHANGE, AND WE'RE FLEXIBLE. >> YOU GUYS CAN FORM A LINE, JUST SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO JUMP EVERY TIME. >> >> I'M WITH A NEWLY STARTED BUSINESS -- >> CAN YOU SPEAK LOUDER, PLEASE. >> ONE, TWO. [ LAUGHTER ] >> I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, YOU GUYS HINTED ON ACCEPTANCE RATES FROM LANDLORDS, SO IF I'M A LANDLORD, WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A CHOICE VOUCHER AND A REGULAR LEASE, LIKE FILING AND ALSO AS A LANDLORD, THE SECOND PART, HOW DO I BEGIN ACCEPTING VOUCHERS? >> HOW DO YOU ACCEPT A VOUCHER? THAT'S THE SECOND QUESTION. HOW DO YOU ACCEPT A VOUCHER, IT'S REALLY, THE VOUCHER PROGRAM IS A CHOICE PROGRAM, SO THE TENANT WILL COME TO YOU AND THEN YOU HAVE TO THEN AGREE TO SIGN WHAT IS CALLED THE REQUEST FOR TENANCY AGREEMENT. THEY TAKE THAT BACK TO THE HOUSING AUTHORITY AND RON CAN GET INTO DETAILS OF THAT ABOUT THE APPROVAL PROCESS, BUT REALLY THE TENANTS WILL COME TO YOU. AND THEN THE FIRST QUESTION AGAIN? >> THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN [INAUDIBLE] >> NOTHING. >> NOTHING. >> NOT A THING. >> IF YOU TAKE ANYTHING WITH YOU FROM THE SESSION, IT'S THAT THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PRIVATE MARKET RENTER AND HCV RENTER. >> WELL, THERE ARE MINIMUM HOUSING STANDARDS. >> WHAT'S THAT? >> THERE ARE MINIMUM HOUSING STANDARDS. >> INSPECTION STANDARDS. >> BUT, YOU KNOW, I LOOK AT THOSE, AND THERE SHOULD BE FOR EVERYBODY. YOU KNOW, WE -- IT'S -- WE HAVE VERY OFTEN MIXED USE PROJECTS WHERE WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, MARKET 60% OF AMI, 40% OF AMI. WE DON'T LIKE -- WE DON'T CHANGE THE LIGHTS LESS ON THE 20 THAN -- YOU KNOW, WE DO IT ALL THE SAME WAY. >> SO THERE ARE LOCAL OCCUPANCY CODES SEPARATE FROM THE SECTION 8 STANDARDS, IT'S JUST THAT THEY'RE A SEPARATE STANDARD. >> SECTION 8 HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING BEYOND THE FORM OF PAYMENT. THE SAME RULES APPLY RELATIVE TO OCCUPANCY STANDARDS, EVICTIONS. EVICTIONS, THEY'RE DEPENDENT ON STATE -- ON THE STATE. I CAN TELL YOU IT'S HARD IN MARYLAND, IT'S EASY IN VIRGINIA. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THERE'S SECTION 8 OR NOT. >> AND THE HOUSING QUALITY STANDARDS ARE A -- IT'S A MINIMUM THRESHOLD. WE'RE ENSURING DECENT, SAFE, SANITARY HOUSING. WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR HIGH END FINISHES, MARBLE IN THE KITCHEN, WE'RE ASKING THAT, FOR ANYTHING THAT YOU -- >> THAT'S FINE. >> THAT WE WOULD -- >> I'M JUST SAYING YOU DO HAVE STANDARDS. THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. >> WE DO HAVE STANDARDS. >> SO, ACTUALLY, MY QUESTION -- YOU SORT OF SPECIALIZE IN SERVING PEOPLE WHO HAVE HOUSING ASSISTANCE. DO YOU SERVE PEOPLE WITH TENANT BASED VOUCHERS IN MULTIFAMILY APARTMENT BUILDINGS? >> YES. >> AND IS THERE A LIMIT AS TO WHAT FRACTION OF THE UNITS CAN BE OCCUPIED BY VOUCHER -- PEOPLE WITH VOUCHERS? >> NO. >> THERE ARE NO RULES ABOUT THAT? SO THEY COULD ALL BE PEOPLE WITH -- >> THEY COULD BE. AND WE WANT GOOD RESIDENTS, AND I GUESS FROM, YOU KNOW -- WE HAVE 4,000 APARTMENTS WITH VOUCHERS. I CAN'T SAY THAT THERE'S ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN -- WE HAVE A GOOD SAMPLE SIZE. WE DON'T EVICT MORE WITH VOUCHERS OR -- YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THE PAYMENT HISTORY IS ACTUALLY BETTER FOR OUR VOUCHER THAN THE NONVOUCHER. >> I JUST REMEMBERED THERE BEING RULES AT ONE TIME, BUT I MIGHT -- MEMORY IS FAULTY. >> OUR VOUCHER RESIDENTS, WE WILL OFTEN HAVE COMMUNITIES WHERE WE HAVE PEOPLE FROM 30% OF AMI TO 100% OF AMI, AND IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'RE GOING TO SAY, OH, THAT'S THE VOUCHER RESIDENT. YOU KNOW, IF YOU GET GOOD RESIDENTS AND HAVE A GREAT COMMUNITY, AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE QUESTION ABOUT THE RISING RENTS AND WANTING TO KEEP UP, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THINK WE HAVE LEARNED ABOUT THIS BUSINESS IN THE AFFORDABLE SECTOR, THAT TURNOVER IS YOUR ENEMY. WE AVERAGED ABOUT 15% TURNOVER LAST YEAR, AND THAT'S A GOOD PLACE TO BE BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE RETENANTING COSTS AND THE LIKE, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE HAVE LEARNED THAT A COMMUNITY IS SAFER WHEN PEOPLE KNOW THEIR NEIGHBORS. AND IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT HAVE A LONG HISTORY OF OCCUPANCY, YOUR COMMUNITY IS GOING TO BE SAFER. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, THANK YOU FOR HOSTING THIS. I HAVE MORE OF THREE OBSERVATIONS THAN ANYTHING ELSE. I WANT TO ECHO MR. CARTER'S COMMENTS, I REALLY BELIEVE IN HIS COMMENTS ABOUT MOST HOUSING PROVIDERS, THEY CARE ABOUT THEIR COMMUNITIES, THEY CARE ABOUT THEIR RESIDENTS, THEY STRIVE TO PROVIDE SAFE AND HABITABLE HOUSING AND THAT'S WHAT DRIVES THEM EVERY DAY. MY FIRST OBSERVATION IS REALLY THE ROLE THAT THE LOCAL HOUSING AUTHORITY -- I DON'T KNOW IF I HEARD ENOUGH ABOUT THAT, BUT THAT'S REALLY CRITICAL IN TERMS OF THE PREDICTABILITY, THE OPERATIONS, THE ADMINISTRATION. I THINK IF ANYTHING WHEN I GET THE CALLS THE E-MAILS, IT'S ABOUT THAT, IT'S THE TIMELINESS OF THE INSPECTIONS, BEING ABLE TO REACH SOMEONE, HAVING A POINT OF CONTACT. WE'VE WORKED WITH MR. MCCOY OVER MANY YEARS, AND I THINK THE THIRD COMPONENT IS THE IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS AND COMMUNICATIONS BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY USED TO MEET HERE IN DC REGULARLY WITH DCHA AND TO SPEAK TO SOME OF THOSE ISSUES, AND OUR CONVERSATIONS WERE SEPARATE KIND OF -- SEPARATE FROM THE SINGLE FAMILY BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE LARGER HOUSING PROVIDERS SO SOMETIMES SIMILAR ISSUES BUT THE SCALE OF THE ISSUES ARE VERY DIFFERENT. AND WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS, NOT TO SAY THAT THERE'S -- THERE'S STILL SOME ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT, NEED FOR FURTHER COMMUNICATION, BUT WE WOULDN'T HAVE REACHED WHERE WE ARE TODAY BUT FOR THOSE CONVERSATIONS. AND THOSE CONVERSATIONS CAN REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF IMPROVING THE EXPERIENCE, I THINK SOMEBODY TALKED TO IN TERMS OF THE STUDY, IF YOU WALK AWAY WITH A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE BECAUSE PEOPLE COMMUNICATE, HOUSING PROVIDERS COMMUNICATE, RESIDENTS COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER, IF SOMEBODY'S WILLING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM, IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT HERE IN DC BECAUSE IT'S REQUIRED, THEY'RE GOING TO GO AWAY WITH A POSITIVE EXPERIENCE AND SHARE THAT WITH THEIR PEERS. SO AGAIN I THINK, JUST TO REITERATE, THE ROLE THE ADMINISTRATION AT THE LOCAL LEVEL MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE. IT'S CRITICAL. AND I'D LIKE TO SEE MORE EXAMINATION, MAYBE NOT OVERSIGHT, BUT I THINK YOU CAN'T DISCOUNT THE ROLE OF THAT. BUT THEN ALSO IN TERMS OF COMMUNICATIONS, IF WE HAVE ISSUES, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO REACH SOMEONE OR HAVE THOSE COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE AGENCY. >> THANK YOU. >> HI, WE OWN ABOUT 300 UNITS IN COLONIAL HEIGHTS, VIRGINIA. WE'RE SOLID WORKFORCE HOUSING. I THINK LAST TIME I CHECKED, ABOUT 30% OF MY RESIDENTS WOULD QUALIFY FOR HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER, IF THEY WERE AVAILABLE. WE DO NOT TAKE VOUCHERS AFTER SEVERAL INTERESTING EXPERIENCES, WHY DON'T WE SAY, WITH DELAYED PAYMENTS AND INCORRECT PAYMENTS AND EXTRA LONG WAITS FOR INSPECTIONS. YOU ASKED AT THE BEGINNING WHAT WOULD IT TAKE FOR LANDLORDS TO PARTICIPATE, AND I CAN TELL YOU WHAT IT WOULD TAKE IS FOR THERE TRULY TO BE NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A VOUCHER RECIPIENT AND A REGULAR LEASING PROFESSIONAL. MY LOCAL APARTMENT ASSOCIATION DEVELOPED THIS LOVELY CHART, I HAVE EXTRA COPIES. THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW, 50 STEPS ON ONE SIDE, WHICH IS THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER LEASING PROCESS AND THERE'S 11 STEPS ON THE OTHER SIDE, WHICH IS THE STANDARD LEASING PROCESS. I JUST REALLY QUESTION HOW HUD CAN PROMOTE EQUALITY BY CLASSIFYING AN ENTIRE GROUP OF ADULTS AS DIFFERENT AND SECOND CLASS CITIZENS. I MEAN, THE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROCESS ITSELF IS FLAWED. IT IS DEEPLY FLAWED. YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO GIVE GRANTS TO PROVIDE TRAINING TO LANDLORDS IF THE PROCESS WORKED BETTER. MY SUGGESTION IS TO MAKE IT MORE LIKE THE WIC PROGRAM, THE WOMEN INFANTS AND CHILDREN. ALL THE HOUSING PROVIDER HAS TO DO IS GET A MACHINE THAT RUNS THE DEBIT CARD THAT IS HANDED TO HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER RECIPIENTS. MANDATING A FLAWED SYSTEM, I ALSO FEAR, WILL HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. YOU START MANDATING IT, PEOPLE JUST REHAB AND RAISE THE RENTS TO THE POINT WHERE A RENT REASONABLENESS TEST WILL NEVER PASS. HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER RECIPIENTS ARE DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE SYSTEM MAKES THEM DIFFERENT, AND WE NEED TO PROVIDE -- >> HOW DO YOU THINK IT MAKES THEM DIFFERENCE? >> BECAUSE OF THIS PROCESS. >> BEYOND THAT -- IT'S A DIFFERENT PROCESS. >> IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT PROCESS, IT HAS REAL TIME AND REAL COSTS, AND AS A LANDLORD WITH A MORTGAGE, IF I HAVE THE CHOICE OF GETTING SOMEBODY IN TOMORROW OR I HAVE THE CHOICE OF GETTING SOMEBODY IN IN THREE WEEKS, I'M PICKING TOMORROW, EVERY TIME. THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS. AND HAVING TO SIGN A CONTRACT WHICH SUPERSEDES MY OWN LEASE IS A PROBLEM. IT'S A VOLUNTARY SYSTEM, AND IT'S VOLUNTARY BECAUSE IT IS CUMBERSOME AND IT SETS PEOPLE WHO NEED HELP THE MOST INTO A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN'T -- THEY'RE TRAPPED. THEY CAN'T GET OUT. THE HOUSING AUTHORITIES ARE COVERED BY BULLETPROOF GLASS, AND IT TAKES WEEKS FOR PEOPLE TO GET AN APPOINTMENT WITH THEM, IF THEY HAVE A PROBLEM. SOME HOUSING AUTHORITIES ARE GREAT, UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S JUST AS MANY THAT ARE NOT. I URGE YOU, INSTEAD OF CONSISTENTLY LOOKING AT LANDLORDS AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR, TO LOOK INTERNALLY, WHICH I UNDERSTAND SECRETARY CARSON IS ALSO ENCOURAGING. BUT MANDATING -- I WOULD LOVE -- IS THERE ANY RESEARCH, ACTUALLY, ON WHETHER OR NOT SOURCE OF INCOME AS A PROTECTED CLASS INCREASES OR DECREASES AFFORDABLE HOUSING? BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE FOR YOU ALL TO LOOK INTO. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] >> PLEASE BE ASSURED THAT HUD IS LOOKING INTERNALLY. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE, IN RECENT YEARS, ISSUED NEW REGULATIONS THAT ARE GOING TO TRY TO HELP STREAMLINE AND ALLOW AGENCIES LIKE THE WASHINGTON, D.C. HOUSING AUTHORITY FLEXIBILITIES TO ADMINISTER THEIR PROGRAMS MORE EFFICIENTLY TO ELIMINATE SOME OF THOSE STEPS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, TO MAKE THE INSPECTION PROCESS A LITTLE MORE -- A LITTLE LESS BURDENSOME, SO, YOU KNOW, WE ARE LOOKING INWARD. PLEASE BE ASSURED OF THAT. >> I'M SHERRY GILBERT, A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY MANAGER, I HAVE MY OWN SMALL UNITS, 35 UNITS. I WORK FOR MOM-AND-POPS. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY HOUSING HCV TENANTS. ALL OF OUR UNITS ARE IN NORTHWEST DC. I'VE RECENTLY BEEN GETTING A LOT OF PHONE CALLS TO MY ADS ASKING IF WE ACCEPT THEM. AND I CAN'T SAY NO, BUT WE HAVE NEVER PARTICIPATED, AND WHEN I GO TO MY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LUNCHEONS, THE ASSOCIATION, THE STORIES THAT I HEAR ARE, YOU KNOW, IT TAKES FOUR MONTHS TO -- YOU KNOW, THE STEPS INVOLVED IS JUST SO CUMBERSOME, AND I'M A SOLE PROPRIETOR, I DO EVERYTHING, SO I DON'T HAVE A STAFF OF, YOU KNOW, HOWEVER MANY PEOPLE. SO I'M SCARED WHEN I GET A PHONE CALL THAT IF I SAY NO, IT'S GOING TO BE A TESTER WHO IS GOING TO COME AFTER ME, SAYING, THERE GOES YOUR LICENSE, AND YET I'M ALSO AFRAID TO EVEN OPEN THE CAN OF WORMS OF STARTING THE PROCESS BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHERE IT'S GOING TO TAKE ME, AND IF I EVEN HAVE THE MANPOWER TO DO IT. SO, I GUESS IT SEEMS OVERWHELMING TO ME TO EVEN BEGIN THE PROCESS. >> WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WOULD MAKE IT LESS OVERWHELMING FOR YOU? >> WELL, MR. MCCOY TALKED ABOUT THE LANDLORD TRAINING PROGRAM, THAT WOULD BE GREAT, AND WHAT I HAD SORT OF HOPED TODAY WAS NUTS AND BOLTS BUT I'M ACTUALLY DELIGHTED TO GET THE WHOLE -- THE BIG PICTURE OF IT TO TAKE BACK TO MY OWNERS, BUT NUTS AND BOLTS WOULD BE GREAT. >> AND I THINK IT'S -- THAT TRAINING IS ESSENTIAL, ESPECIALLY FOR PROSPECTIVE LANDLORDS LIKE YOURSELF. I WANT TO SAY THAT NOT ONLY DO -- DOES THE HOUSING AUTHORITY IN MY VOUCHER PROGRAM ADMINISTER THE FEDERAL, BUT WE ADMINISTER THE MAJORITY OF THE LOCAL AS WELL, AND ALL OF THEM HAVE DIFFERENT RULES, AND THEY CAN BE CONFUSING TO LANDLORDS AS TO WHICH PROGRAM DOES WHAT BECAUSE IT MAY BE THOSE STEPS THAT WERE OUTLINED EARLIER, IT MAY BE TOTALLY DIFFERENT STEPS USING LOCAL VOUCHERS, AND THEY'LL COME TO YOU AND JUST SAY A VOUCHER AND YOU WOULDN'T KNOW WHICH ONE. WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WORKING WITH OUR CITY PARTNERS TO COME UP WITH EVEN MORE ROBUST OUTREACH AND TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR PROSPECTIVE LANDLORDS TO TEACH YOU ABOUT EVERY SINGLE HOUSING PROGRAM THAT'S OUT THERE BECAUSE YOU'LL HEAR VOUCHER BUT IS IT A LOCAL ONE, A FEDERAL, AND THEY MAY HAVE DIFFERENT RULES. SO I ENCOURAGE YOU, IT'S ACTUALLY THE NEW TRAINING SCHEDULE SHOULD BE POSTED NEXT WEEK ON OUR WEBSITE, AND IT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, AND YOU CAN SIGN ON AND THEN WE CAN GIVE YOU ALL OF THE DETAILS THAT YOU NEED ON THE VARIOUS PROGRAMS. >> THANK YOU. >> AND PLEASE KNOW THAT THE DC HOUSING AUTHORITY, WHILE THEY'RE DOING GREAT WORK, THEY'RE NOT THE ONLY ONES THAT ARE PROVIDING THIS TYPE OF SERVICE, THIS ADDITIONAL LEVEL OF SERVICE TO MAKE THE PROGRAM MORE ACCESSIBLE AND COMFORTABLE FOR LANDLORDS LIKE YOURSELF WHO JUST ARE UNCERTAIN. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN YOUR LOCAL AREA, IT'S REALLY MORE ABOUT REACHING OUT TO THAT PHA, SEEING WHAT'S AVAILABLE, BECAUSE YOU'LL BE SURPRISED THAT MOST OF THEM HAVE SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES THAT WILL TRY TO HELP YOU ENTER INTO THE PROCESS WITH A LITTLE LESS TREPIDATION. >> HI, MY NAME IS RICK JONES. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME HERE TODAY. I'M FROM CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA, I'VE BEEN A PROPERTY MANAGER AND OWNER FOR 48 YEARS. FIRST JOB I EVER HAD OUT OF COLLEGE, AND NEVER CHANGED. WE MANAGE OR OWN ABOUT 4,000 APARTMENTS IN VIRGINIA, A FEW IN NORTH CAROLINA. WE'VE BEEN IN SEVERAL SECTION 8 PROGRAMS. ONE IS VOUCHER, ONE WAS, I THINK IT WAS A SECTION 8 REHAB MANY YEARS AGO. WE STARTED WITH A PROJECT IN MANASSAS AS AN 800 UNIT PROPERTY, WE STARTED WITH, I THINK, 50. IT SEEMED LIKE A GREAT DEAL AT THE TIME BECAUSE WE HAD A LOT OF VACANCY. AND IT WAS A QUICK MEANS TO FIND RESIDENTS THAT WE NEEDED. WE'RE DOWN TO NOW ABOUT THREE AFTER 20 YEARS OF THAT PROGRAM, AND WE BASICALLY JUST DECIDED THAT THE BUREAUCRACY LEVEL, THE DELAY, WAS SO GREAT THAT WE JUST, AS PEOPLE MOVED, WE DID NOT REPLACE THEM IN CHARLOTTESVILLE, WE GOT OUT OF THE PROGRAM BECAUSE WE ARGUED WITH THE LOCAL HOUSING AUTHORITY OVER FMR, AND WE JUST -- IT WAS NO LONGER PROFITABLE. SO I WOULD ALSO ECHO WHAT MS. FERRAR SAID, THAT IT IS A DIFFERENT PROGRAM. IF IT WERE THE SAME, IF I COULD GET THE SAME RENTS AND I COULD OPERATE THE SAME AS I DO WITH MY OTHER 4,000 UNITS, NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS RJ GARCIA, WITH E & G GROUP IN THE DC AREA, WE MANAGE ABOUT 4,000 UNITS IN THE GREATER DC AREA AND WE OWN ABOUT 1500 OF THEM. SO, ONE ISSUE THAT WE HAD COME UP LAST YEAR AT THE NEA, THE NATIONAL MULTIFAMILY HOUSING FOLKS LET US KNOW THAT LAST YEAR THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A DANGER WHERE THAT SOME OF THE VOUCHERS THAT HAD CURRENTLY EXISTED MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO BE REFILLED FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR. AND FOR US, WE DO ALL AFFORDABLE AND WE MOSTLY WORK WITH A LOT OF VOUCHER HOLDERS WITH YOU GUYS AT THE HOUSING. AND THE CONCEPT OF THESE VOUCHERS NOT BEING ABLE TO BE REFILLED WAS A SERIOUS ISSUE FROM SOME OF OUR MORE INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS. I WOULD SAY THE FIRST QUESTION IS, IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE CONTINUALLY AFRAID OF IN THE COMING YEARS, AND MORE SO THAN THAT, WHEN ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO START ACTUALLY ADDING MORE VOUCHERS AND NOT JUST TRYING TO STAY AFLOAT AND TRYING TO HELP MORE FOLKS? >> AS YOU CAN SEE, IF YOU LOOKED AT THE WORD CLOUD, FUNDING IS A HOT ITEM. IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE. THAT'S A CONGRESSIONAL DECISION, UNFORTUNATELY. WE WOULD LOVE TO PROVIDE AS MUCH MONEY OUT THERE TO PROVIDE AS MUCH HOUSING AS POSSIBLE, BUT IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO WHAT'S APPROPRIATED AND WE HAVE TO MAKE THE MOST OF WHAT'S AVAILABLE IN THESE ESCALATING RENT MARKETS, SO THAT'S WHY A LOT OF IT IS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND HOW THEY SET THEIR PAYMENT STANDARDS AND BEING ABLE TO SERVE AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE, BUT THEN YOU ALSO HAVE THE COUNTER, IN AREAS WHERE YOU HAVE HIGH RENTAL COSTS, THE HIGHER YOUR PAYMENT STANDARD IS, THE LESS PEOPLE YOU'RE ABLE TO SERVE. SO IT'S A DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD. BUT THE IDEA IS THAT WE DO NEED ADDITIONAL FUNDING, SO, YOU KNOW, START A LETTER-WRITING CAMPAIGN, YOU KNOW, TO YOUR LOCAL CONGRESSMAN. I SAY THAT IN JEST BUT THAT'S WHAT IT TAKES. THE NEED, THE DRUM HAS TO BE CONTINUED TO BE BEAT SO THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT THERE'S A GROWING NEED OUT THERE. THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT ARE GAINFULLY EMPLOYED, TEACHERS, ENTRY LEVEL POLICE OFFICERS AND FIREMEN IN CERTAIN AREAS THAT QUALIFY FOR THESE PROGRAMS. THEY'RE NOT THE PEOPLE THAT YOU THINK ALL THE TIME. >> AND I WOULD SAY ESPECIALLY IN THE DC AREA WITH HOW HIGH RENTS ARE, THAT IS SOMETHING WE SEE WHEN WE DO A LEASE ON IT, WE'RE IN NEGOTIATIONS THIS WEEK, AND YOU SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE MAKING 14, 15 DOLLARS AN HOUR AND STILL ABLE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF ASSISTANCE. I CAN PERSONALLY SPEAK TO THAT. >> I WOULD SAY THAT ABOUT A QUARTER OF OUR VOUCHER RESIDENTS ARE 2-INCOME FAMILIES, AND WHAT IT JUST MEANS IS THAT THEY DON'T MAKE VERY MUCH MONEY AND THEY'RE VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE RENTAL AREAS, BUT THEY'RE TWO INCOMES. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. SETH EMBRY, I'M A POLICY ANALYST. TWO POINTS, REALLY, COMMENTS, MAYBE QUESTIONS. THE FIRST, I THINK GREAT SEGUE, WHERE YOU TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET AND GREAT QUESTION, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A -- TO KEEP IT SHORT, HUD'S BUDGET PROPOSAL FOR THIS COMING FISCAL YEAR FOR HAP RENEWALS AND FOR FEES ARE BOTH UNDER THE CURRENT APPROPRIATION FOR NY 18. LUCKILY, THE SENATE, THE APPROPRIATION BILL THEY PASSED IS FOR ADMIN FEES I THINK WERE AT 100% PRORATION AND 85% -- I'M SORRY, ADMIN FEES -- 85%. HAPPEN WAS AT 100% AND WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE FUNDING BILL COMES. BUT THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM WHEN IT COMES TO LANDLORD INCENTIVES, NOT ONLY THAT BUT ALSO THE OTHER TESTS THAT A HOUSING AUTHORITY PERFORMS, INSPECTION ON TIME, RESEARCH, ALL THE ADVERTISING, THE PAYMENTS, MAINTAINING TECHNOLOGY, TRAINING FOR STAFF, ALL THOSE THINGS ARE COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON FUNDING, YES, THAT COMES FROM CONGRESS, BUT THOSE FEES, YOU KNOW, I -- IT'S GREAT THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING AT DCHA BUT OBVIOUSLY MOST OF THE AGENCIES IN THE COUNTRY, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE 3,000 AGENCIES YOU TALKED ABOUT DON'T HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY AND FUNGIBILITY THEY HAVE IN DC. I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO SEE, AS YOU GO FORWARD WITH MORE RESEARCH, WHAT THE -- WHAT WE CAN TEASE OUT IN TERMS OF LANDLORD SATISFACTION FOR AGENCIES THAT HAVE THE FUNDING AVAILABLE AND NECESSARY TO DO THESE KINDS OF INNOVATIVE LANDLORD INCENTIVES AND OUTREACH THINGS THAT OTHER AGENCIES SIMPLY CAN'T DO BECAUSE THE QUESTION HERE, AGENCIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE STRUGGLING TO STAY AFLOAT. AND SO WITH THAT, I'M ALSO INTERESTED IN KNOWING, REALLY, THE RESEARCH THAT YOU ALL TALKED ABOUT IS, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT LANDLORDS BEING DISTANCED -- TURNED OFF ON THE PROGRAM, AND WE MENTIONED LATE PAYMENTS OR INSPECTIONS. IN THERE IS OR IF WE CAN FIND DATA TO EITHER SUPPORT OR NOT SUPPORT THOSE INDIVIDUAL PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE PROGRAM, SO YOU MENTIONED A SPECIFIC LANDLORD WAS IN DISAGREEMENT WITH INSPECTION AND INCONSISTENCIES, BUT IS IT THAT -- IS WHAT'S REPORTED AS HIS EXPERIENCE, IS THAT BORNE OUT BY THE DATA THAT THE HOUSING AUTHORITY WOULD HAVE ON ACTUAL INSPECTIONS? AND I DON'T THINK -- I HAVEN'T READ THE FULL REPORT, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU GET INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL, BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET TO THAT STEP IN FUTURE RESEARCH. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> CAN I JUST SAY ONE THING TO THAT? BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT PERCEPTIONS VERSUS REALITY, AND I THINK REPUTATION MATTERS. AND SO IF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY IS DOING REALLY GREAT WORK ON INSPECTIONS, THEN REALLY CHANGING THAT REALITY AND THAT PERCEPTION IS REALLY IMPORTANT, SO FIGURING OUT HOW TO DO THAT IS IMPORTANT. >> NATIONAL FAIR HOUSING ALLIANCE, CHEVON. SO, WHAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT, IT SEEMED, WITH THE REPORT AND RESEARCH, WHAT I NOTICED WAS THE HIGHER ACCEPTANCE RATES SEEM TO BE IN JURISDICTIONS LIKE DC THAT HAVE LOCAL PROTECTIONS. I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO DIG DEEPER IN THAT AND SEE IF IT'S TRUE ACROSS THE BOARD. WHAT MANY OF THE LANDLORDS HAVE SAID IS SOMETHING THAT WE OFTEN HEAR AND WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE FOUND AS WELL, IS THAT INSPECTIONS ARE HUGE DETERRENCE TO WANTING TO ACCEPT HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS. THERE ARE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES MADE EQUAL IN VIRGINIA WHO HAVE MOBILITY PROGRAMS WHO ARE DOING THE WORK TO ENCOURAGE LANDLORDS TO ACCEPT HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS, WHILE ALSO WORKING WITH TENANTS WHO HAVE HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS. I'D BE INTERESTED IN KNOWING IF YOU HAVE, IN ADDITION TO SPEAKING WITH LANDLORDS, SPOKEN WITH THE ORGANIZATIONS DOING THE WORK TO CONVINCE LANDLORDS, WHAT HAS HELPED IN THEIR WORK WITH LANDLORDS? >> I THINK, YOU KNOW, AS WE EMBARK UPON THIS PROCESS, WE STARTED WITH LANDLORDS. WE WERE ALSO REACHING OUT TO THE INDUSTRY GROUPS AND THOSE OTHER GROUPS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, SO WE HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE THAT INFORMATION YET IN TO FIND OUT WHAT THE SUCCESSES ARE, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE GOING TO VALUE THAT OPINION AND MAKE SURE WE TAKE IT ACCOUNT. WE ARE COMING UP ON THE 4:00 P.M. HOUR. I KNOW THAT WE WERE SCHEDULED FOR TWO HOURS, BUT WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM A LOT OF THE LANDLORDS AND SO IF THERE'S ANY LANDLORDS THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME IN HERE AND TELL US WHY THEY PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM AND LET EVERYBODY KNOW THAT THE -- THE BENEFITS THAT YOU ARE REAPING FROM BEING A LANDLORD. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. LEROY BATTLE. I'VE BEEN A LANDLORD IN THE SYSTEM IN D.C. AND BALTIMORE FOR ABOUT 15 YEARS OR SO, AND OVERALL, IT'S BEEN A GOOD EXPERIENCE. OBVIOUSLY IT TAKES A POCKET FULL OF PATIENCE ON MOST OCCASIONS, WHETHER I'M DEALING WITH TENANTS MOSTLY, AND I'VE JUST -- TO GIVE A COUPLE BRIEF VIGNETTES, I'VE WORKED FOR A VERY LARGE DEVELOPER YEARS AGO, I THINK THEY'VE DEVELOPED ABOUT 20,000 RESIDENTIAL, AND THEY DID CATER TO, YOU KNOW, SECTION 8 VOUCHER HOLDERS, AND SOME FOLKS WOULD SAY, IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE RESIDENTS OR THE LADIES, IT'S USUALLY THE BAD BOYFRIEND. SO I'VE HAD SITUATIONS MORE RECENTLY WHERE I HAD TO GET A BAR NOTICE AGAINST SORT OF ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN FRIENDS, AND THEN THE OTHER MATTERS ARE, I GUESS THE OTHER BIG TWO MIGHT BE INSPECTIONS, CERTAINLY I LIVE IN A PROPERTY, GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD, MY WIFE AND I JOKE THAT IF AN INSPECTOR CAME IN, WE WOULD PROBABLY FAIL INSPECTION, YOU KNOW. YOU COULD GO TO HOME DEPOT GET ONE OF THOSE TESTERS, STICK IT IN THE OUTLET, COME UP AS AN OPEN GROUND AND NO LANDLORD -- MOST OF THEM IN THESE NICE NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE DISTRICT SORT OF REWIRE THE PLACE JUST TO GET A SECTION 8 VOUCHER HOLDER, SO THAT'S JUST ONE ISSUE. THEN THE MATTER OF, I GUESS YOUR MEDIATION PROGRAM, I WAS NOT AWARE OF THAT TO THE EXTENT IF THAT'S SORT OF ADVERTISED, YOU KNOW, I DO GET THE E-MAILS BUT I MISSED THE FACT THAT YOU HAD THAT TYPE OF OUTREACH. SO THAT'S MY EXPERIENCE. I CONTINUE TO BE A LANDLORD AND WILL LIKELY STAY IN THE GAME BUT CERTAINLY AFTER 15 YEARS, HAVE SEEN SORT OF ALL SIZE, HALO PROGRAM, VERY MUCH NECESSARY. I FIND THAT SOME PEOPLE JUST DON'T KNOW HOW TO MANAGE A PROPERTY. SOME BAKE THINGS, THEY JUST -- BASIC THINGS, YOU THINK PEOPLE MAY HAVE HAD THOSE AND STILL SETS, THEY MAY NOT HAVE HAD THOSE EXPERIENCES AND DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. I APPLAUD YOU FOR DOING THAT. >> OUR COMMUNICATION, OUR MESSAGING HAS TO IMPROVE. WE KNOW THAT, FROM THE HUD LEVEL, AT THE PHA LEVEL. LIKE YOU SAID, THERE'S CERTAIN PARTS OF THE PROGRAMS YOU'VE BEEN A PARTICIPANT WITH THE D.C. HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR 15 YEARS, THERE'S CERTAIN PARTS OF IT THAT YOU AREN'T AWARE OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING. SO WE HAVE TO DO A BETTER JOB COMMUNICATING, ESPECIALLY TO THE LANDLORDS OUT THERE THAT ARE CONSIDERING THE PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROGRAM BECAUSE WE REALLY NEED TO BRING THEM IN AS WE SEE THAT THE COST OF RENTS ARE GOING UP, THE VACANCIES ARE GOING UP A LITTLE BIT, BUT WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET THESE PEOPLE INTO THESE UNITS. A LITTLE LOGISTICS AS WE WRAP UP HERE, THOSE THAT DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO COMMENT, IF YOU DIDN'T PUT A COMMENT ON LINE, WE DO HAVE COMMENT CARDS OUT FRONT THAT YOU CAN LEAVE THAT WITH ME IF YOU DIDN'T WANT TO GET UP IN FRONT OF THE MICROPHONE. IF YOU WANT E-MAIL COMMENTS, YOU CAN E-MAIL COMMENTS TO LANDLORDS @HUD.GOV. I'D LIKE TO THANK THE PANELIST, MR. MCCOY, MS. ROSEN, MR. CARTER, MRS. CUNNINGHAM. WE APPRECIATE YOU GUYS TAKING THE TIME OUT OF YOUR SCHEDULES TO SPEAK TO THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE. AND THANK YOU GUYS FOR TAKING TIME OUT OF YOUR SCHEDULE FOR COMING IN AND PARTICIPATING. NEXT TIME WE'LL HAVE A LIVELIER DISCUSSION FROM PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE. THANK YOU, GUYS, HAVE A GREAT DAY. I APPRECIATE IT

Contents

Voting trends

Historically, the 12th and its predecessors had been a swing district. However, redistricting following the United States Census, 2000 gave the district a somewhat bluer hue than its predecessor. It absorbed most of Trenton, along with a number of other municipalities.

The redistricting made second-term Democrat Rush D. Holt Jr. considerably more secure; he had narrowly defeated freshman Republican Michael Pappas in 1998, and had only held on to his seat against Dick Zimmer (who represented the district from 1991 to 1997) by 651 votes. In 2002, despite an expensive challenge from former New Jersey Secretary of State Buster Soaries, Holt was re-elected with 61%.

Since then, the 12th has trended into a Democratic-leaning district, as measured by the Cook PVI.[3] In 2004, Holt was re-elected over real estate executive Bill Spadea (59–41%) and again in 2006 over former Helmetta Council President Joseph Sinagra (65–35%).

In 2008, Holt defeated Holmdel Township Deputy Mayor Alan Bateman (62–36%).

In 2010, while Democrats suffered huge House loses, Holt defeated Princeton venture capitalist Scott Sipprelle and Independent Kenneth J. Cody (53–46–1%).

Holt retired in 2014, and was succeeded by State Assembly Majority Leader Bonnie Watson Coleman.

Counties and municipalities in the district

A change was made by the New Jersey Redistricting Commission that took effect in January 2013 with the 113th United States Congress, based on the results of the 2010 United States Census. The district currently contains portions of four counties and 31 municipalities:[4]

Mercer County (10)

East Windsor Township, Ewing Township, Hightstown, Hopewell Borough, Hopewell Township, Lawrence Township, Pennington, Princeton, Trenton and West Windsor Township

Middlesex County (14)

Cranbury Township, Dunellen, East Brunswick Township, Helmetta, Jamesburg, Middlesex, Milltown, Monroe Township, North Brunswick Township, Old Bridge Township (part, also 6th), Plainsboro Township, South Brunswick Township, South River Borough, and Spotswood Borough

Somerset County (4)

Bound Brook, Franklin Township, Manville and South Bound Brook

Union County (3)

Fanwood, Plainfield, Scotch Plains (part, also 7th)

History

The 12th congressional district (together with the 11th district) was created starting with the 63rd United States Congress in 1913, based on redistricting following the United States Census, 1910.

Recent election results

Presidential races

Year Office Results
2000 President Gore 56 - 40%
2004 President Kerry 54 - 46%
2008 President Obama 58 - 41%
2012 President Obama 66.5 - 32%
2016 President Clinton 65 - 32%

List of members representing the district

Member Party Years Cong
ress
District Home Electoral history Counties/Towns
District created March 4, 1913
James A. Hamill Democratic March 4, 1913 –
March 3, 1921
63rd
64th
65th
66th
Jersey City Redistricted from the 10th district.
[Data unknown/missing.]
parts of Jersey City
Charles F. X. O'Brien (New Jersey Congressman).jpg

Charles F. X. O'Brien
Democratic March 4, 1921 –
March 3, 1925
67th
68th
Jersey City [Data unknown/missing.]
Mary Teresa Norton cph.3b14795.jpg

Mary Teresa Norton
Democratic March 4, 1925 –
March 3, 1933
69th
70th
71st
72nd
Jersey City [Data unknown/missing.]
Redistricted to the 13th district.
FrederickRLehlbach.jpg

Frederick R. Lehlbach
Republican March 4, 1933 –
January 3, 1937
73rd
74th
Newark Redistricted from the 10th district.
[Data unknown/missing.]
parts of Essex
Frank William Towey Jr. Democratic January 3, 1937 –
January 3, 1939
75th [Data unknown/missing.] [Data unknown/missing.]
KEANROBERTWIN.jpg

Robert Kean
Republican January 3, 1939 –
January 3, 1959
76th
77th
78th
79th
80th
81st
82nd
83rd
84th
85th
Livingston [Data unknown/missing.]
George M. Wallhauser.jpg

George M. Wallhauser
Republican January 3, 1959 –
January 3, 1965
86th
87th
88th
Maplewood [Data unknown/missing.]
Paul J. Krebs.jpg

Paul J. Krebs
Democratic January 3, 1965 –
January 3, 1967
89th [Data unknown/missing.] [Data unknown/missing.]
Florence Dwyer.jpg

Florence P. Dwyer
Republican January 3, 1967 –
January 3, 1973
90th
91st
92nd
[Data unknown/missing.] Redistricted from the 6th district.
[Data unknown/missing.]
parts of Essex and Union
Matthew J. Rinaldo.jpg

Matthew John Rinaldo
Republican January 3, 1973 –
January 3, 1983
93rd
94th
95th
96th
97th
Union Township [Data unknown/missing.]
Redistricted to the 7th district.
parts of Union
Jim Courter.jpg

Jim Courter
Republican January 3, 1983 –
January 3, 1985
98th
99th
100th
101st
Hackettstown Redistricted from the 13th district.
[Data unknown/missing.]
parts of Hunterdon, Morris, Somerset, Sussex, Union, and Warren
January 3, 1985 –
January 3, 1991
Hunterdon and parts of Mercer (Princeton and West Windsor), Middlesex,

Morris, Somerset, Sussex, and Warren

Richard Alan Zimmer portrait.gif

Dick Zimmer
Republican January 3, 1991 –
January 3, 1993
102nd
103rd
104th
Delaware [Data unknown/missing.]
Retired to run for U.S. Senator
January 3, 1993 –
January 3, 1997
parts of Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, and Somerset
MichaelJamesPappas.jpg

Michael James Pappas
Republican January 3, 1997 –
January 3, 1999
105th Franklin (Somerset) [Data unknown/missing.]
Rep Holt Official Headshot.jpg

Rush D. Holt Jr.
Democratic January 3, 1999 –
January 3, 2003
106th
107th
108th
109th
110th
111th
112th
113th
Hopewell Township (Mercer) [Data unknown/missing.]
January 3, 2003 –
January 3, 2013
NJ12congressdistrict

parts of Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, and Somerset

January 3, 2013 –
January 3, 2015
Mercer (except Hamilton and Robbinsville), Middlesex (Cranbury, Dunellen, East Brunswick, Helmetta, Jamesburg, Middlesex, Milltown, Monroe, North Brunswick, Plainsboro, South Brunswick, South River, and Spotswood), Somerset (Bound Brook, Franklin Township, Manville and South Bound Brook), and Union (Fanwood, Plainfield, and part of Scotch Plains)
Bonnie Watson Coleman.jpg

Bonnie Watson Coleman
Democratic January 3, 2015 –
present
114th
115th
116th
Ewing [Data unknown/missing.]

References

  1. ^ https://www.census.gov/mycd/?st=34&cd=12
  2. ^ "Partisan Voting Index – Districts of the 115th Congress" (PDF). The Cook Political Report. April 7, 2017. Retrieved April 7, 2017.
  3. ^ Barone, Michael; Richard E. Cohen (2008). The Almanac of American Politics. Washington, D.C.: National Journal Group and Atlantic Media Company. pp. 14, 1084. ISBN 978-0-89234-117-7.
  4. ^ Plan Components Report, New Jersey Redistricting Commission, December 23, 2011. Accessed November 6, 2016.

This page was last edited on 3 September 2019, at 02:19
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.