My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/17/2017 (2)
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2010's
>
2017
>
01/17/2017 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/23/2017 1:44:52 PM
Creation date
4/13/2017 12:07:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Date
01/07/2017
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
204
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The rule's preamble notes that "a program participant's strategies and actions may include <br />strategically enhancing neighborhood assets,- 78 Fed. Reg. 43716, but this strategy should not be <br />implemented in a manner that perpetuates segregation. §5.152. <br />Recognizing that "[s]egregation carries a heavy social cost," 78 Fed. Reg. 43714, the <br />Proposed Rule replaces the Analysis of Impediments (Al) with a new framework—the <br />Assessment of Fair Housing, or AFH—through which program participants must identify, <br />analyze and mitigate barriers to fair housing choice, and ties it to other planning processes <br />through which federal, state and local resources are allocated. In other words, it creates a fair <br />housing lens for all of a participant's decisions about housing and community development <br />needs. Participants must submit AFIls to HUD, which can reject noncompliant AFIls, and <br />impose a range of sanctions for noncompliance, up to and including \vithholding federal funds. <br />The new framework requires greater reliance un data (which will be supplied by HUD), <br />greater transparency and public participation in the development of the AFH, and greater <br />accountability with respect to expanding housing choice. Most importantly, it will require <br />program participants to initiate and follow through on jurisdiction -specific community <br />con \ ersations about race, segregation and access to opportunity areas. <br />Finally, the Proposed Rule emphasises that a participant's AFFH obligation is not <br />bounded by what it can do with the HUD funds it has received. The strategies and actions "will <br />be accomplished primarily by making. investments with federal and other resources...." §5.152; <br />78 Fed. Reg. 43716. This regulatory language reinforces a provision that has been in HUD's <br />Fair Housing Planning Guide, at p. 1-3, since 1996: <br />Applicability: Although the grantee's AFFH obligation arises in <br />connection with the receipt of Federal funding, its AFFH obligation is <br />not restricted to the design and operation of HUD -funded programs at <br />the State or local level. The AFFH obligation extends to all housing <br />and housing -related acti \ ities in the grantee's jurisdictional area <br />whether publicly or pri' atel:\ funded. <br />Procedural Issues in the Proposed Rule <br />• HUD will provide uniform data sets to allow participants to identify fair housing issues. <br />§5.154(c) <br />• Participants are required to develop and submit an initial AFH to HUD 270 days before <br />the start of the block grant or PHA funding cycle. §5.160(a). If the AFH is not submitted <br />by August 16 of the fiscal year for which funds were appropriated, a participant will <br />automatically lose CD130 funds. §5.160(b). Participants w ill be required to submit an <br />AFH every fie years, §5.160(c), or when "a significant material change in circumstances <br />occurs that calls into question the continued validity of the AFH.,.." <br />/r2 -J.6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.