EMERGENCY
HOUSING VOUCHER
TRANSITION PLAN
ACTION ITEM April 28, 2026
Item 1
Housing Choice Voucher (HCV)
For five decades, the Housing Authority has administered the federal Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program (Section 8).
The program provides rental subsidies to low-income, senior households, allowing them to afford safe and stable housing in the private market by covering a portion of their rent 2,572
Total vouchers administered
$51.8M
Annual HAP budget
722
Applicants on waitlist. Last opened: 2001
2 EHV PROGRAM AT A GLANCE
Created under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, to serve the most vulnerable residents. Federal funding was projected through 2030, but soaring rents have accelerated the timeline to approximately CY 2026. (Pending Confirmation) 188
Households Supported
Seniors, persons with disabilities, families with
children, and survivors of domestic violence
$347K
Monthly HAP Obligation
Ongoing housing assistance payments required to
keep EHV households housed
$4.17M
Annual HAP Obligation
Total yearly cost to sustain the full EHV portfolio
3 FEDERAL FUNDING SCENARIOS
The ultimate cost and reliance on local funding depends on a race between two federal clocks: when EHV funding runs out, and if/when Tenant Protection Vouchers (TPVs) are authorized. ✅ Scenario A — TPV Pathway
If FY26 THUD TPVs are allocated, they could provide a
long-term solution to support EHV households. However,
the timing, scale, and implementation of these resources remain uncertain. At this time, TPVs represent the only viable long-term pathway
Scenario B — Bridge Reliance
EHV funding depletes before Congress authorizes
TPVs. The City can use local funding - HOME, homeless
services - to provide temporary subsidy.
• FY2026 THUD bill, proposes $600M+ for TPVs, and $336M for Homeless Assistance Grants. • Submitted a request for $3.6 million in state funding . • Engaged in ongoing coordination and advocacy with state legislative representatives to advance a proposal for a one-time $500 million in state-wide forgivable loan program.
THUD - Transportation, Housing and Urban Development/ TPV - Tenant Protection Vouchers 4
HOW REGIONAL PEERS ARE RESPONDING
The common thread: an agency's HCV budget health directly dictates its EHV transition capacity.
Agency EHV Portfolio Transition Strategy
Orange County 489 Gradual absorption into regular HCV as capacity allows
Los Angeles ~2,700 No absorption plan — operating under HCV funding shortfall
LA County 1,581 No absorption plan — operating under HCV funding shortfall
Burbank 53 Exploring options; pursuing TPVs and most-
vulnerable transitions
Pasadena 85 Place households on waitlist. Transfer to various PBV programs when available.
Glendale 188 TBD
5 WHY GLENDALE CANNOT SIMPLY ABSORB EHV HOUSEHOLDS
6 HUD guidance permits transitions of EHV households into the regular HCV program. For Glendale, absorption is not currently feasible.
Budget Shortfall
The regular HCV program is currently operating under a shortfall of $700,000.
Shortfall Set-Aside
Staff submitted request under Category 1 – Prevention of Terminations Due to Insufficient Funding (Shortfall), which provides adjustment funding to prevent terminations of participating families in the HCV program. The Housing Authority was approved for set-asides end of CY 2025.
1 HCV WAITLIST: THREE OPTIONS
HUD encourages transitioning EHV households to the regular HCV program — but Glendale cannot absorb them without resolving its $700K shortfall first. Placement on the waitlist does not provide immediate subsidy.
Pursue HUD Waiver
Submit a good-cause justification
to HUD to automatically place all
188 EHV households onto the
closed HCV waitlist — no individual
applications required.
Targeted Waitlist Opening
Formally open the waitlist
exclusively for EHV participants
with a preference point ranking
system. Requires public comment
period and approval.
Defer Action
Take no action now. Focus entirely
on pursuing TPVs and deploying
the temporary subsidy with local
bridge funds. Revisit if federal
funding materializes.
7 2 3
PARKVIEW GLENDALE: UPDATE
Parkview offers 11 dedicated HOME ARP senior units - a key long-term off-ramp. Fixed pro- forma rents ($750/studio, $710/1BR) require a City subsidy to bridge the gap between rent and what seniors can afford.
8 • Per HUD, the previously presented placement options are no longer feasible. • Implement a randomized lottery limited to the 70 EHV households age 62 or above to determine placement.
• Evaluate selected households to confirm eligibility based on HOME program requirements.
• A subsidy gap will remain, an estimated approximately $221K to $837K, depending on final placements and resident income levels. • Residents would receive rental subsidies for up to 15 years, consistent with the affordability covenant period.
AVAILABLE LOCAL FUNDING FOR TEMPORARY SUBSIDY
9 ~$3.7M
HOME Funds
~$434K
Homeless Services
Total: $4.1M
FOUR-TIER PRIORITIZATION
10 Option 1: Balanced Prioritization Option 2: Senior-First Prioritization Tier 1 – Highest Risk (24)
• 62 or older with disabilities
• ≤15% AMI
• Homeless / fleeing violence
• Glendale residents
Tier 1 – Most Vulnerable Seniors (24)
• 62 or older with disability
• ≤15% AMI
• Homeless / fleeing violence
• Glendale residents
Tier 2 – Moderate Risk (47)
• Disabled HH or families with children
• ≤30% AMI
• Homeless / fleeing violence
• Glendale residents
• 70 or older automatically included
Tier 2 – All Remaining Seniors (40)
• All 62 or older households protected regardless of income or status
• Glendale residents
Tier 3 – At-Risk (80)
• ≤30% AMI or “At Risk” status
• Seniors (62+), disabled, or families protected
• Glendale residents
Tier 3 – Non-Senior Vulnerable (31)
• Disabled Households, families, or ages 55–61
• ≤30% AMI
• Homeless / fleeing violence
• Glendale residents
Tier 4 – Transition (37)
• Higher income or non-Glendale
• Greater ability to transition independently
Tier 4 – Transition (93)
• Able-bodied adults under 62
• “At Risk” status
• Higher income exceeding 30% AMI
Subsidy Allocation Scenarios Monthly Expenditure Rate
$347K
Available Funds
$4.13M
Scenario Option 1 Coverage Option 2 Coverage
A — All 188 Households ~12 Months ~12 Months
B — Tiers 1 & 2 Only ~30 Months ~36 Months
C — Tiers 1, 2 & 3 Only ~14 Months ~23 Months
D — Tier 1 Only ~94 Months ~94 Months
Scenario Opt 1 Coverage for All
HH
Opt 1 Extended Tiers Opt 2 Coverage for All
HH
Opt 2 Extended Tiers
E — All HH for 3m, then
T1/T2 ~3 Months ~21 Months ~3 Months ~36 Months
F — All HH for 6m, then
T1/T2 ~6 Months ~14 Months ~6 Months ~18 Months
G — All HH for 3m, then
T1–T3 ~3 Months ~11 Months ~3 Months ~17 Months
H — All HH for 6m, then
T1–T3 ~6 Months ~7 Months ~6 Months ~11 Months
11 SRO Concept - Est. 35 Beds
Explored a single-room occupancy model with on-site services for single adults and seniors. Estimated $60K/month to operate.
Would require substantial investment to take full advantage of facility.
Hamilton Court
Could provide eight available spaces that can be utilized to directly support women in the EHV program who are fleeing violence and facing housing instability. Assistance would be temporary. (15 to 24 Months)
OTHER OPTIONS EXPLORED
12 HCV Waitlist
Transfer EHV households to the Section 8 waitlist and how to handle the transfer. • Purse the HUD Wavier
• Open waitlist exclusively to EHV participants with preference points • Defer waitlist action
Parkview Glendale
Conduct lottery for EHV participants to begin transition of eligible households into 11 units.
Temporary Subsidy
Establish temporary subsidy using Home and Homeless Services Funds.
POLICY DIRECTIONS
13 QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
Perception:
Some agencies appear to be taking immediate action by:
• Applying for HUD waivers and placing EHV households on the HCV waitlist Reality:
• These steps do not provide immediate or guaranteed assistance. Once EHV funding ends, assistance is still discontinued unless replacement funding is available
• The majority of housing authorities do not have sufficient HCV capacity or funding to absorb all or a significant amount EHV households Key Takeaway:
• Adding households to the waitlist does not prevent loss of assistance in the near term. At best, it creates a future possibility of assistance, often years down the line
• While actions taken by other agencies may signal progress, it is a symbolic in nature, they do not materially change outcomes for most EHV households in the foreseeable future
Perception vs. Reality
14 QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
Perception Reality
PIH Notice 2025-19 allows agencies to place EHV households on the HCV waitlist and transition them only if vouchers are available. However, this is not a solution. Without available funding or capacity, households will still lose assistance when EHV funding ends, making waitlist placement a procedural step rather than immediate relief.
15 QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
HUD's $1,000 award
The one-time $1,000 administrative fee per transitioned household covers processing only not the long-term rental subsidy needed to keep households housed. The award would only apply per EHV family that is successfully transitioned to the regular HCV program, because Glendale is in a shortfall this option is not available.
Staff confirmed with the City of Long Beach that while a waiver allows EHV households to be placed on the HCV waiting list, this does not guarantee continued assistance. HACLB has notified participants that, due to limited federal funding, rental assistance is expected to end around October 2026. HACLB also noted it does not have sufficient funds to transition all EHV households to the HCV program.
City of Long Beach
Shortfall Set-Aside
Staff submitted request under Category 1 – Prevention of Terminations Due to Insufficient Funding (Shortfall), which provides adjustment funding to prevent terminations of participating families in the HCV program due to insufficient funding. The Housing Authority was approved for set-asides end of CY 2025. 16 Shortfall $700,000 Methodology
The shortfall number presented by staff is produced by HUD. Staff was informed in writing end of CY 2025 that the program was in shortfall. Staff has asked for analysis and is waiting for further updates on the current shortfall statues.
Amount Category
Total RPHP $ 2,105,698.6
Legal Services $ 421,140 Direct Assistance RPHP - GRASP $ 1,179,191 Salaries
Delivery Cost $ 294,798 Salaries
Admin $ 210,570 Direct Assistance
Error
Amount Category
Total RPHP $ 2,105,698.6
Legal Services and
Renter Education
($334,000 waived to
Direct Assistance) $ 87,140
Legal Services Direct
Assistance
RPHP - GRASP $ 1,513,191 Direct Assistance Delivery Cost $ 294,798 Admin
Staffing $ 210,570 Salaries
Actual
Approximately 10% is allocated to direct program staffing, with an additional 14% supporting administrative oversight, supplies, and operational needs.
For a total of 24% non-direct assistance allocation, well below 65%.
QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
LACAHSA RFP: LACAHSA has released multiple rounds of Requests for Proposals (RFPs), primarily targeted toward developers, nonprofit organizations, and jurisdictions that do not receive a direct allocation of LACAHSA funding. The City of Glendale receives funding directly from LACAHSA and, as a result, is generally not eligible to compete for these RFP opportunities. Additionally, any LACAHSA funding that may be available is inherently temporary and subject to stricter program requirements and eligibility criteria. As such, while LACAHSA resources can provide short-term support, they do not represent a long-term or comprehensive solution for sustaining assistance for EHV households.
LACAHSA
17 QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
HCV program
+34 in 12 weeks. Does not track with a
freeze.
Claim
Claim has been made that there is
an increase in 34 active leases in 12
weeks.
Reality
The 1,373 figure represents the leased
HCV count. Over the past 12 weeks, this
number has decreased by four, resulting
in 1,373 active leases.
The 1,411 total presented in the report
includes Fair Share vouchers, which are
now counted as regular vouchers.
1,373 + 38 = 1,411
18 Small Area Fair Market Rents
19 Payment Standard
20 Income Limits
21 Attachment 7
Option 1: Balanced Approach
Tier Households Avg Age Senior (62+) Disabled Families w/ Children
Below 15%
AMI
Avg Annual
Income
Avg Gross
Rent
Avg Tenant
Rent
Avg Subsidy
(HAP)
Tier 1 24 72.2 100% 100% 0% 100% $ 14,356 $ 2,096 $ 91 $ 1,847 Tier 2 47 60.8 53% 74% 11% 64% $ 17,316 $ 2,420 $ 341 $ 1,921 Tier 3 80 48.3 19% 21% 6% 62% $ 18,475 $ 2,379 $ 224 $ 1,978 Tier 4 37 44.7 16% 27% 0% 38% $ 31,764 $ 2,375 $ 718 $ 1,479 TOTAL PORTFOLIO 188 53.8 37% 46% 5% 63% $ 20,275 $ 2,353 $ 333 $ 1,849 Option 2: Senior-First Prioritization
Tier Households Avg Age Senior (62+) Disabled Families w/ Children
Below 15%
AMI
Avg Annual
Income
Avg Gross
Rent
Avg Tenant
Rent
Avg Subsidy
(HAP)
Tier 1 24 72.2 100% 100% 0% 100% $ 14,356 $ 2,096 $ 91 $ 1,847 Tier 2 40 71.2 100% 60% 0% 52% $ 18,325 $ 2,284 $ 333 $ 1,781 Tier 3 31 48.8 0% 55% 16% 77% $ 14,232 $ 2,517 $ 293 $ 2,063 Tier 4 93 43.2 6% 23% 5% 53% $ 24,655 $ 2,393 $ 409 $ 1,807 TOTAL PORTFOLIO 188 53.8 37% 46% 5% 63% $ 20,275 $ 2,353 $ 333 $ 1,849 22