Working group seeks to align federal rental programs (but don’t tell)
Last month I mentioned the Rental Policy Working Group set up by the White House Domestic Policy Council with the goal of identifying inconsistencies, burdens and inefficiencies, finding opportunities for greater alignment among federal rental programs and ultimately making recommendations for improvement toward these ends. Little did I know when I sat down to research and write this article that there had been a recent controversy involving this group and the secrecy that they have been demanding of participants involved in these processes, but then I remembered something from my recent time in Washington that pulled it all together. News like this is especially enticing when it matches up to our own real world experiences, which is rare in the work-a-day world of affordable housing. I’ll get to the particulars of the “scandal” later in the article.
The Rental Policy Working Group was initially convened in July 2010 to bring together an interagency contingency from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Treasury along with other industry professionals to work toward greater alignment in federal housing programs. Their recommendations, which were tasked to interagency teams formed from those assembled, incorporated areas of specific concern in need of greater coordination including physical inspections, operating budgets and financial reporting, appraisals and market studies. In addition, other items of housing management interest to be explored were compliance, subsidy layering and the definition of tenant income. It was also suggested that standardization of forms be considered along with better overall agency coordination.
The goal of this alignment work is “to reduce costs and paperwork obligations for property owners, developers, managers, and state and local governments” according to a recent White House blog. The schedule for the Working Group production is to develop conceptual solutions in the first quarter of 2011; to draft recommendations in the second quarter; and to provide recommendations for implementation to the Federal agencies in the third quarter of 2011. We will keep all of you informed as to the results as soon as they have been published.
As for the controversy, on February 18, 2011 it was reported that Representative Judy Biggert – R, IL has called for an independent probe of the White House’s requirement that industry professionals involved with the Working Group sign a disclosure statement agreeing not to disseminate any information gained from their participation in the collaborative effort. The issue seems to fly in the face of the Obama Administration’s goal of promoting greater transparency in government affairs. While in DC, I was sitting with some state agency folks who were waiting to attend one of the Working Group meetings later that afternoon. They were a bit perplexed as to why they had to sign those statements as well. It’s interesting to see that the issue has now gained national attention. We’ll also keep you posted on whether anything comes from the probe.
I guess the bottom line is that we would all like to see greater coordination between these agencies, their definitions and requirements, and the paperwork we have to do at our properties. Greater harmony should always be the goal to provide better managed and maintained properties. I guess it would be too much to expect for this to happen without some bureaucratic haggling and a twist of controversy, though.
Next month we’ll discuss the income limits publication update.