We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
As property values have increased, there’s been more litigation about what a below-market right of first refusal means.
On Sept. 15, the Third District Court of Appeals for the State of Florida affirmed a Florida nonprofit’s ownership of an LIHTC site. Specifically, the court affirmed the Opa-Locka Community Development Corporation’s (OLCDC’s) right of first refusal under Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code to acquire and preserve the site for affordable housing [Opa-Locka Community Development Corp. v. HK Aswan LLC, September 2021].
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) recently announced it will propose rescinding the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) rule issued in May 2020. In 2020, the OCC proposed regulations intended to modernize the agencies’ regulations under the CRA, which haven’t been substantively updated for nearly 25 years.
Every year, the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) puts out its "Out of Reach" report examining the housing wage, the hourly wage a full-time worker must earn to afford a modest, safe rental home without spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. The report covers all states, counties, metropolitan areas, and ZIP codes in the country, highlighting the gap between what renters earn and what it costs to rent.
Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies recently released its annual “State of the Nation’s Housing 2021” report. You can download the report at www.jchs.harvard.edu/state-nations-housing-2021. Each year, the report summarizes the housing market and challenges faced by renters and homeowners. This year, the report finds soaring home prices, a tight housing supply, and millions facing risk of eviction or foreclosure.
In early June, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that it would continue to stay a lower court ruling seeking to overturn the CDC eviction moratorium. In the lower court ruling, a federal judge set aside the CDC's nationwide moratorium which expires on June 30, 2021 [Alabama Association of Realtors, et al. v. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services]. The decision was based primarily on the judge’s reading of the Public Health Services Act.
The Biden-Harris administration recently announced a set of proposals designed to help narrow the racial wealth gap and reinvest in distressed communities, focusing on expanding access to homeownership and small business ownership. The administration’s announcement provides new information regarding President Biden’s American Jobs Plan proposals to create jobs and build wealth in communities of color.
On May 5, 2021, a federal judge in the District of Columbia set aside the CDC's nationwide moratorium on residential evictions, which the CDC had recently extended beyond its congressionally approved expiration date of March 31 to June 30, 2021 [Alabama Association of Realtors, et al. v. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services].
On March 29, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced an extension of the federal eviction moratorium through June 30, 2021. Before this extension, the moratorium was set to expire March 31, 2021. This recent order is the moratorium’s third extension since it was initially enacted on Sept. 4, 2020. As before, individuals who are unable to pay their rent in full must sign and submit a declaration form to their landlord to invoke the eviction protections and can apply for emergency rental assistance.
On average, developers needed to layer an average of 3.5 different funding sources to finance developments built between 2000 and 2018, according to a recent report published by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation at UC Berkeley. One in four sites layered at least five (and in some cases as many as 11) sources. The average number of sources has also increased over time, in line with the rise of development costs, according to the report, “The Complexity of Financing Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Housing.”
In a recent case from Alaska, an LIHTC site owner tried to exercise an option to be able to exit the affordability restrictions put in place by the extended use agreement. There are two ways an owner can escape extended use commitments, but the court ruled that neither applied here. In applying for LIHTCs and signing the restrictive agreement the owner clearly showed an intent to commit to maintaining affordability requirements for 30 years.
RSS