City Council
Housing Authority
Report
City Council Meeting: September 13, 2022
Agenda Item: 7.A
1 of 11
To: Housing Authority, Mayor and City Council
From: Andy Agle, Director, Community Services Department, Housing and Human Services
Subject: Section 8 Resident Advisory Board Approaches
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the Housing Authority Board review and comment on the current and alternative approaches to achieving Resident Advisory Board input on the Santa Monica Housing Authority Plans, and direct the City Manager to return to City Council following the November 2022 election with actions necessary to implement direction received from City Council or further discussion regarding the alternatives presented, as warranted.
Summary
Each year, the Santa Monica Housing Authority (SMHA) must submit an Annual Plan and any updates to the Administrative Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 75 days before the beginning of July-June fiscal year.
Every five years, the SMHA must also submit to HUD a 5-Year Plan within the same deadline. Together, the 5-year Plan, Annual Plan, and Administrative Plan represent the SMHA Plan (collectively referred to as the Plans). Prior to submission of the Plans, federal regulations require that the SMHA’s Resident Advisory Board (RAB) have an opportunity to provide input on the proposed Plans.
Santa Monica’s RAB consists of all 1,300+ voucher holders whose Housing Choice Vouchers are administered by the SMHA. The current process involves notifying all members of the RAB and inviting direct input on proposed Plans via email/mail/phone.
RAB members also have an opportunity to comment annually during a Housing Commission and Housing Authority Board meeting when the SMHA Plans are Attachment A
2 of 11
agendized for review and approval. In April 2022, the Housing Authority Board asked staff to present alternative approaches to the RAB input process for consideration. The following report provides background information, key regulations, current compliant practice, and three alternatives, and seeks direction on any desired revisions to the RAB process.
Background
At its April 12, 2022, meeting, the Housing Authority Board directed staff to return with a discussion of options on alternative ways to facilitate RAB input on the Santa Monica Housing Authority Plans. The following report is provided in response to the Housing Authority Board’s direction.
Purpose of Resident Involvement In Public Housing
“The role of a resident council is to improve the quality of life and resident satisfaction and participate in self-help initiatives to enable residents to create a positive living environment for families living in public housing.” (See Title 24 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 964 for more information on tenant participation in public housing.) Given the substantial role a Public Housing Authority (PHA) may play in the life of its public housing residents, federal regulations allow tenants residing in public housing to create resident councils. Many PHAs own and operate public housing and therefore serve as the property owner to the tenants who reside in such housing, as well as the subsidy provider that ensures each tenant’s portion of the rent is affordable. However, other PHAs, such as the Santa Monica Housing Authority (SMHA), do not own or operate public housing and only administer rental-housing voucher programs, such as the Housing Choice Voucher program (commonly known as Section 8), which allow tenants to obtain affordable housing in the broader private housing market. Tenants with vouchers reside in hundreds of privately owned properties located throughout cities and PHAs do not have a role in how such properties are managed and operated, except for ensuring that federal Housing Quality Standards are met through periodic inspections.
Different Ways to Structure Resident Involvement
3 of 11
PHAs that own and operate public housing may have a resident (tenant) council for each specific public housing property or may have a jurisdiction-wide resident council to represent tenants of several public housing properties within a PHA’s jurisdiction. Since the SMHA does not own or operate public housing, it is referred to as ‘voucher-only’ PHA, and regulations regarding resident councils are not applicable to the SMHA.
While voucher-only PHAs do not have resident councils, they must have a Resident Advisory Board to allow an opportunity for input into the PHA plan. (See 24 CFR 903 for more information on PHA Plans.)
Key federal regulations regarding the role of a RAB are as follows (24 CFR 903.13):
• “The role of the Resident Advisory Board (or Resident Advisory Boards) is to assist and make recommendations regarding the development of the PHA plan, and any significant amendment or modification to the PHA plan.” • “The PHA shall allocate reasonable resources to assure the effective functioning of Resident Advisory Boards. Reasonable resources for the Resident Advisory Boards must provide reasonable means for them to become informed on programs covered by the PHA Plan, to communicate in writing and by telephone with assisted families and hold meetings with those families, and to access information regarding covered programs on the internet, taking into account the size and resources of the PHA.” • “Where the PHA has a tenant-based assistance program of significant size (where tenant-based assistance is 20% or more of assisted households), the PHA shall assure that the Resident Advisory Board (or Boards) has reasonable representation of families receiving tenant-based assistance and that a reasonable process is undertaken to choose this representation.”
• “The PHA must consider the recommendations of the Resident Advisory Board or Boards in preparing the final Annual Plan, and any significant amendment or modification to the Annual Plan, as provided in §903.21 of this title.” The purpose of the RAB is to provide input to SMHA staff regarding the PHA Plan for consideration prior to staff presenting recommendations to the Housing Authority Board, 4 of 11
the governing body of the Housing Authority. Typically, the SMHA receives input from only a few voucher program participants, if any, although it is common to receives input from the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, based on their experiences in representing voucher-program participants.
Public Housing Authority Plan
The PHA Plan is a comprehensive guide to PHAs goals and objectives, as well as operational policies implementing the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program. There are two initial components to the PHA Plan - the 5-Year Plan and the Annual Plan. The 5-Year Plan must be approved once every fifth fiscal year, and the Annual Plan, every year, 75 days before the start of the fiscal year.
Since the SMHA is a ‘voucher-only PHA’ and uses a three-page streamlined Annual Plan form per federal requirements, the complete policies and procedures for administering the HCV program are detailed within 17 chapters of the SMHAs Administrative Plan, the third component of the PHA Plan. The HCV program is a highly regulated federal program (see Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 982) involving these aspects:
1) waitlist administration
2) initial program eligibility
3) annual recertification
4) Housing Quality Standards and periodic inspections
5) document verification hierarchy
6) annual income calculations
7) subsidy limits
8) appeals
9) terminations
10) monthly and annual reporting
5 of 11
Therefore, PHAs have limited discretion in forming local policies and procedures.
Subsequently, the SMHA’s Administrative Plan includes a combination of federally established regulations and a few local, discretionary approaches to administering the HCV program where allowed. For example, PHAs must adhere to the federal regulations regarding admittance to the program, ongoing eligibility, periodic inspections, and maximum subsidy limits, but can exercise local discretion in prioritizing certain applicant groups, allocating vouchers to specific properties (known as projectbased vouchers), and selecting models to comply with maximum subsidy amounts.
Evolution of SM RAB Approaches
Given that the SMHA does not own or operate any publicly owned housing, there are no resident (tenant) councils that comply with the tenant-participation regulations under the tenant-based assistance program. Therefore, voucher-only PHAs have discretion in the RAB appointment process.
Federal regulations and HUD guidance provide local PHAs broad discretion in the formation of the RAB, as follows: “Section 8-only PHAs have discretion in the RAB appointment process. Participation in a RAB is limited to residents that are assisted under federally assisted public housing and the Section 8 tenant-based program.” Also:
“PHAs have discretion in determining the method of appointment of RABs, as long as a PHA ensures that its RAB or RABs reflect and represent all the residents assisted by the PHA.”
Prior to 2020, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) recognized the Housing Commission as representing the function of a RAB due to its inclusion of two voucher program participants, monthly meetings, annual review and input to the PHA plan, and role as an advisory body to the City Council, which periodically convenes as the governing body of the SMHA, known as the Housing Authority Board.
In early 2020, the SMHA staff selected a seven-member RAB, consistent with HUD written guidance that personal appeals are a strategy that may be more likely to obtain commitments from program participants to serve on the RAB. 6 of 11
In March 2021, the SMHA expanded the RAB to include all 1,300+ Section 8 program participants (i.e., HCV participants). (Note that the SMHA administers other voucher programs, and those participants are included in all noticing of opportunities to comment on the SMHA plans but are not considered part of the RAB.) The decision to expand the RAB was made after discussion with the local HUD field office about RAB models used by other housing authorities. Another consideration was concern from some community members that a RAB selected by staff was not transparent. Among two general models, one model limits the RAB to a closed group of HCV participant representatives and the other model includes all HCV participants. SMHA currently uses the more inclusive option, which allows for participation by all HCV participants.
Discussion
Current RAB approach and Input Opportunities
The RAB currently includes all 1,300+ participants in the HCV program and is consulted annually regarding the SMHA plan and any time significant revisions to the plan are proposed. SMHA’s Plan is available online year-round on the City’s website, consisting of the 5-year Plan, the Annual Plan, and the Administrative Plan. In a typical year, the proposed SMHA Annual Plan (a streamlined, 3-page federal form) and Administrative Plan (containing federally established policies and some local discretionary policies) are posted for a 45-day public review period. As mentioned earlier in this report, given the highly regulated nature of the HCV program, opportunities for the local SMHA to create discretionary policies are limited in scope.
All SMHA program participants, including the RAB (which consists only of HCV participants), are directly notified annually via email and mail and are encouraged to provide input regarding each year’s Annual Plan and Administrative Plan. Typically, there may be no proposed changes to the Annual Plan and minor proposed changes to the Administrative Plan to enhance voucher household opportunities and clarify policies.
Some years there may be no proposed changes to the Annual and Administrative Plans, but HUD still requires the public review and Housing Authority Board approval process to occur. The notification to program participants describes the process for submitting feedback, allowing for various formats including email, paper mail, and/or 7 of 11
telephone, as well as public meetings of the Housing Commission and City Council (meeting as the Housing Authority Board).
The current model of the RAB and the methods of input reflect a simple feedback loop between the RAB and SMHA staff in which attendance at (usually evening) meetings is not required. Additional opportunities for input at public meetings are also provided.
The following summarized the current approach:
1. Email/mail/phone feedback method respects the privacy of participants not comfortable exposing their program participation in a public setting, or who may have obligations which conflict with attending meetings.
2. Housing Commission meetings are also held to receive public input on the SMHA plans and RAB members (and all voucher program participants) are notified of the opportunity to attend the Housing Commission meeting and provide input.
3. Housing Authority Board (HAB) meetings where the proposed SMHA plans are considered and RAB members, as well as the broader public, may provide input.
It should be noted that the SMHA is required by federal regulations to recognize and address recommendations made by RAB members, whether such recommendations come from an individual or a group.
The following table summarizes requirements regarding the RAB and describes how compliance is currently being achieved by the SMHA:
RAB Requirement Current Compliant Approach
PHAs have discretion in determining the
method of appointment of RABs, as long as a
PHA ensures that its RAB or RABs reflect
and represent all the residents assisted by
the PHA. Participation in a RAB is limited to
residents that are assisted under federally
assisted public housing and the Section 8
tenant-based program.
All SMHA participants in the Section 8
(officially known as the Housing Choice
Voucher program) have been appointed as
RAB members, allowing for the broadest
possible inclusion of voucher residents in the
RAB.
8 of 11
RAB Requirement Current Compliant Approach
The role of the Resident Advisory Board (or
Resident Advisory Boards) is to assist and
make recommendations regarding the
development of the PHA plan, and any
significant amendment or modification to the
PHA plan.
All SMHA RAB members are provided both
discreet (via email/mail/phone) and public
opportunities (Housing Commission and
Housing Authority Board) to provide input and
make recommendations regarding the PHA
plan and proposed modifications.
The PHA shall allocate reasonable resources
to assure the effective functioning of
Resident Advisory Boards. Reasonable
resources for the Resident Advisory Boards
must provide reasonable means for them to
become informed on programs covered by
the PHA Plan, to communicate in writing and
by telephone with assisted families and hold
meetings with those families, and to access
information regarding covered programs on
the internet, taking into account the size and
resources of the PHA.
SMHA Plans (5-Year Plan, Annual Plan,
and Administrative Plan) are available
online year-round.
City website has additional information
about SMHA programs.
RAB and assisted families are one in the
same, and not distinct groups.
RAB consists of all HCV assisted families
and are invited to an annual meeting
hosted by the Housing Commission as a
forum for providing input, which must be
considered by SMHA staff and
communicated to the Housing Authority
Board (HAB) prior to the HABs review and
approval of the proposed SMHA plans.
HUD has approved the current SMHA
approach to the RAB as in compliance
because RAB members are provided
opportunities for input on the SMHA plans.
The PHA must consider the
recommendations of the Resident Advisory
Board or Boards in preparing the final Annual
Plan, and any significant amendment or
modification to the Annual Plan, as provided
in §903.21 of this title.
When presenting the final, proposed SMHA
plans to the Housing Authority Board and to
HUD for consideration and approval, the
SMHA includes both summary and verbatim
feedback and recommendations from the
RAB.
Alternative to Current RAB Input Process
While the current RAB approach and process has been approved by HUD, some community members have requested that the City take additional steps to facilitate a more robust RAB process. Examples of suggestions include an opportunity for the RAB membership to meet as a group, discuss issues, and make recommendations to the SMHA. Although the role of the RAB is to provide input on the PHA Plans, a process which occurs annually, some community members have also suggested that multiple 9 of 11
RAB meetings per year, such as quarterly, could improve the exchange of information among voucher program participants as well as comprehension about SMHA policies.
The three options described below and further detailed in Attachment A represent possible alternatives for Council consideration and direction regarding approaches to conducting RAB meetings and formation, in the order of least to most resourceintensive.
Existing staffing resources are available to facilitate a virtual opt-in communication channel (Option 1) or a virtual annual RAB meeting in place of the RAB’s annual opportunity to provide feedback at a Housing Commission meeting (Option 2). Should Council desire Option 3 or a different approach not mentioned in this report, additional resources or direction to divert existing resources from current affordable housing priorities would be needed.
Option 1 - Facilitate Opportunities for RAB Members to Meet Virtually and Independently of SMHA
A virtual communication channel to facilitate group communication could be created as an informational forum for RAB members, who voluntarily opt-in, to converse in general about voucher program issues. This option would create an email group (e.g., LISTSERV) to provide opportunities for participants to schedule in-person or virtual meet-up groups. The communication channel could serve as a springboard to other types of connections. Once formed, participating RAB members would be responsible for the manner and frequency in which to communicate and/or convene (virtually, inperson, hybrid) without SMHA involvement.
Option 2 - SMHA Organizes and Supports Virtual Annual RAB Workshop Staff would organize and conduct an annual RAB workshop, in-lieu of the traditional annual Housing Commission forum for feedback on the SMHA Plans. Option 1 could also be implemented to complement this Option 2. The next SMHA Annual Plan cycle begins in early 2023, so with Council direction to proceed with Option 2, the next annual RAB workshop could occur in February 2023.
10 of 11
Option 3 - Council-Appointed RAB Which Meets Quarterly
Council would appoint a subset of HCV participants to a RAB to represent all 1,300+ HCV participants and staff would then organize and support quarterly RAB meetings. (A few community members have suggested quarterly meetings.) Before this option could be implemented, staff would return to Council at mid-year to recommend specifics regarding Council appointment of the RAB, RAB operations, and staff resources necessary for implementation. However, as the next SMHA Annual Plan cycle begins in early 2023, staff would continue the existing approach to RAB input involving direct communication between SMHA staff and the 1,300+ RAB members during February.
Additionally, with Council direction, staff would implement the Option 1 approach of creating a group-level communication forum for interested parties to opt-in, to allow participants to convene and collaborate prior to the 2023 SMHA Annual Plan input process.
See also Attachment A for further details regarding resources, implementation, opportunities, and considerations associated with each of the three options.
Other Considerations
In considering alternative methods to the existing formation and input opportunities of the RAB, Council may wish to wait for the outcome of the November 2022 election, as one of the ballot initiatives, if adopted, would generate funding for affordable housing programs and require a resident oversight committee. Given the existing RAB and the Housing Commission, and the possibility of a new resident oversight committee, there may be a convergence of affordable housing issues and policy that fall under the various bodies. An opportunity would then exist to clearly identify the roles and scope of the various bodies, the existing and necessary human and capital resources to adequately function, and the corresponding required budget actions.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Options 1 and 2 can be implemented with currently budgeted resources. Staff will return to Council if specific budget actions are required in the future 11 of 11
associated with resources necessary to implement Option 3 or other Council-directed processes for RAB input.
Prepared By: Jim Kemper, Housing Program Manager
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Alternative Approaches for SMHA Resident Advisory Board Input Process B. Written Comments