If this part doesn't scare you, "In short, if CDBG or HOME demolish or convert lower income housing to
some other use, then housing units lost must be replaced one-for-one,
and lower income people displaced must get adequate compensation that is
generally better than Uniform Relocation Act (URA) compensation.", try thinking about being displaced in Montana in just 10 degree Celsius weather, in a town with no church, no homeless shelter and no transportation 25 miles down the road. I bet compensation falls short of covering any medical needs that may become interrupted until transportation and housing can be found in some areas of Montana.
Major Revision to CDBG/HOME One-for-One Anti-Displacement Handbook Chapter
HUD revised, for the first time since 1990, handbook guidance
regarding displacement caused by the use of CDBG or HOME funds. The
Housing and Community Development Act was amended in 1987 in an attempt
to minimize displacement by the addition of Section 104(d), also known
as “the Barney Frank amendment” after the provision’s sponsor and
champion, Representative Barney Frank (D-MA). The statute creating the
HOME program later gained the same provisions.
In short, if CDBG or HOME demolish or convert lower income housing to
some other use, then housing units lost must be replaced one-for-one,
and lower income people displaced must get adequate compensation that is
generally better than Uniform Relocation Act (URA) compensation.
Chapter 7 of HUD Handbook 1378,
Tenant Assistance, Relocation and Real Property Acquisition,
is completely revised. The previous edition was, primarily, a
repackaging of the regulations, which are at 24 CFR Part 42, Subpart C.
The September 2011 revision is a streamlined presentation emphasizing
guidance.
A casualty of the streamlining is the loss of any reference to the
provision offering displaced tenants rental assistance for five years to
ensure that they do not pay more than 30% of their income for shelter.
This is the primary tenant compensation feature of Section 104(d) that
makes it superior to URA’s compensation.
Also, at several places in the revised guidance the term “tenant”
replaces “persons.” The statute and the regulations use the terms
“persons” or “families” throughout. Chapter 7 could have the effect of
implying that lower income homeowners are not entitled to Section 104(d)
compensation (although URA might be more beneficial for homeowners).
Chapter 7 is improved by including several examples attempting to
draw distinctions between “indirect” and “direct” displacement, focusing
on when the use of CDBG for infrastructure activities or code
enforcement, which past policy generally exempted, might trigger the
Section 104(d) requirements. Any CDBG-funded activity that has a
sufficient, physical impact on a property directly causing displacement
is subject to the law, while an activity that indirectly leads to
displacement is exempt. Notably, if CDBG-assisted code enforcement is
part of a single undertaking that plans to demolish or convert
affordable homes, even if privately funded, HUD might determine that the
code enforcement is being conducted “in connection with” the project,
engaging the Section 104(d) obligations.
The revised Handbook clarifies that a manufactured home may be
subject to the Section 104(d) provisions if it is considered “real
property” under state law and it is on a foundation, without wheels, and
connected to utilities.
Governments are reminded that their notices of displacement and
relocation assistance must address the needs of people who might require
reasonable accommodation due to disabilities or limited English
proficiency. Also, notices to tenants inform them that if they are not
legally present in the U.S. they are not entitled to relocation
compensation, unless it would “result in exceptional and extremely
unusual hardship on a qualifying spouse, parent, or child.”
A separate Exhibit 7-2 contains seven important sample situations
illustrating crucial meaning of the term “development project.” This is
important to ensure that Section 104(d) is activated even if only one
component of a project is assisted in part by CDBG or HOME. Three of the
samples are enhanced versions that were in the old Chapter 7; the other
four samples are new. One sample explains that if a public housing
agency gets approval from HUD to demolish a 20-unit public housing
project, and receives CDBG from the local government to assist in the
demolition and HOME to construct lower income housing on the site, the
local government is responsible for one-for-one replacement and tenant
relocation assistance (assuming the tenant chooses not to accept
alternative public housing or a voucher).
Revised Chapter 7, Exhibit 7-2, and the Transmittal Notice announcing the revision, Change 11, are available at
http://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/hudclips/handbooks/cpdh/1378.0/index.cfm.
