The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Ben Carson announced the department will ultimately terminate the Obama Administration’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) regulation issued in 2015, reporting it was “complicated, costly and ineffective—so much so that Secretary Carson essentially removed its burden on communities by suspending the regulation’s 92-question grading tool in January 2018.”
“After reviewing thousands of comments on the proposed changes to the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) regulation, we found it to be unworkable and ultimately a waste of time for localities to comply with, too often resulting in funds being steered away from communities that need them most,” said Secretary Carson.” Instead, the Trump Administration has established programs like Opportunity Zones that are driving billions of dollars of capital into underserved communities where affordable housing exists, but opportunity does not. Programs like this shift the burden away from communities so they are not forced to comply with complicated regulations that require hundreds of pages of reporting and instead allow communities to focus more of their time working with Opportunity Zone partners to revitalize their communities so upward mobility, improved housing and homeownership is within reach for more people. Washington has no business dictating what is best to meet your local community’s unique needs.”
National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) President Vince Malta issued the following statement in response.
“The National Association of REALTORS® is disappointed that HUD has taken this step, which significantly weakens the federal government’s commitment to the goals of the Fair Housing Act,” said Malta, broker at Malta & Co., Inc., in San Francisco, Calif. “The viability of our 1.4 million members depends on the free, transparent and efficient transfer of property in this country, and NAR maintains that a strong, affirmative fair housing rule is vital to advancing our nation’s progress toward thriving and inclusive communities. With the pandemic’s disproportionate impact on people of color reminding us of the costs of the failure to address barriers to housing opportunity, NAR remains committed to ensuring no American is unfairly denied this fundamental right in the future.”
Following the administration’s initial proposal in January, NAR publicly commented that the changes threatened to strip away the rule’s original civil rights purpose, as mandated by the 1968 law.
For more information, please visit www.nar.realtor.
It is obvious that the real estate industry liked the old program because it allowed these resources to be steered into areas that did not need the special care thus creating just another scam program that did not accomplish what it was intended in the first place. It wasted resources and had little to do with accomplishing its stated goals. The old program is very similar to other programs that were concocted so that everyone supposedly would benefit by increasing home ownership (I.e., the old Clinton HUD “Heart” program) thereby inflating the true value of real estate leading to the catastrophic “Bubble”. Selling to people who cannot afford property only increases demand thus inflating values to the point of being potentially a major cause of the next bubble and probably crash, similar to 2008. Congratulations Secretary Carson and his approach of targeting such programs only to the areas in need and eliminating much of the administrative overhead these programs always generate. Also for not allowing the general public who really do not need such programs to dilute the intended effects, thereby causing another false valuation of real estate.
“The National Association of REALTORS® is disappointed that HUD has taken this step, which significantly weakens the federal government’s commitment to the goals of the Fair Housing Act,”
How does establishing programs like Opportunity Zones that are driving billions of dollars of capital into underserved communities where affordable housing exists undermine Fair Housing?
Disappointed in NAR’s position.
Once again, the left leaning union, NAR, disagrees with sensible governance at the expense of its members.
Good. I’m tired of complicated
government mandates.
As a Realtor, I’m disgusted , though not surprised, that this step is being taken by this administration. I am, however, heartened by president Malta’s response.
San Francisco does not have the same needs as Ledyard Ct or Braxton,MS
Local problems need local solutions!
Let local government and businesses work together to find the answers.
This is NOT a fair housing issue – this is a BIG GOVERNMENT ISSUE. The topic of HOUSING and URBAN DEVELOPMENT is not mentioned a single time in the Constitution of the United States, and is best left to the states and to local communities. What will work in San Francisco is NOT the same as what will work in ATLANTA or CHICAGO or MAYBERRY USA. What we need in this county is LESS GOVERNMENT, LOWER TAXES, and MORE FREEDOM.
I disagree with NAR on this issue. The money is better off in the hands of the communties, as long as officials make sure the money is used for what it is intended. Like Mr. Carson says, the communties don’t need to be burdened with regulations. We still have the Fair Housing Act. This will not be affected. NAR, you are showing your colors.