"NYSPHADA Responds to PHAS Interim Rule"
created on 2011-04-25 15:28:21
Regulations Division
Office of General Counsel,
Department of Housing and Urban Development
451 Seventh St., S.W.
Room 10276
Washington, D.C. 20410-0500
Re: Docket No. FR-5094-I-02, Interim Rule, Public Housing Evaluation and Oversight: Changes to the Public Housing Assessment System (PHAS) and Determining and Remedying Substantial Default
Dear Madam or Sir:
I am writing on behalf of the New York State Public Housing Authorities Directors Association (NYSPHADA), which represents 65 small, medium and large public housing authorities across the State of New York. Thank you for the opportunity to provide our opinion on the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Interim Rule on Public Housing Evaluation and Oversight.
Specifically, our comments address Docket No. FR-5094-I-02, Interim Rule, Public Housing Evaluation and Oversight: Changes to the Public Housing Assessment System (PHAS) and Determining and Remedying Substantial Default.
We commend HUD for the improvements made to the original proposed rule, and in particular support HUD’s decision to omit the duplicative on-site management review.
NYSPHADA appreciates the reopening of the public comment period, and would like to express several concerns with the interim rule. Most significantly, we urge HUD to allow all public housing authorities, regardless of their Fiscal Year end dates, to have the opportunity to understand the new rating system in advance of such rating. According to the notice, public housing authorities whose fiscal years end March 31, 2011 will be evaluated based on the interim rule. These agencies will be evaluated on a new set of indicators with new scoring thresholds for a year which is over before the final rule is officially announced. We believe the interim rule should first be put in place for agencies whose fiscal years begin after the interim rule is finally published, and would prefer a 12 month advance notice. Furthermore, it is not necessary for all public housing authorities to move to the new PHAS system at the same time.
We are also concerned with the tenant accounts receivable (TARs) standards that are in the interim rule. NYSPHADA supports measuring TARs with a process oriented evaluation system, rather than on the absolute amount owed to the authority.
It is clear that public housing authorities will have different TARs because of different property and program characteristics. Family properties and elderly properties have very different rent payment histories, for example. And authorities that choose to serve certain resident groups, such as the homeless, should not be penalized because of the likely higher accounts receivables that may occur with certain resident groups. In addition, many local factors outside of an authority’s control can cause increased TARs. Judging the measures taken to collect rents would be a more fair and accurate method to measure performance in this arena.
Additionally, we do not believe that occupancy should be part of the Capital Fund indicator, as it is already in the management indicator. In fact, vacancy is now the most important sub-indicator in the assessment system. Authorities should not be forced to prioritize vacancy preparation as they determine their greatest needs for their capital funds monies. We also strongly question the fairness of the new occupancy rates of 98%. Other multifamily programs have 95% occupancy rates. If a public housing authority achieves a 95% occupancy rate, it would be considered a failing grade. This new rate appears to be arbitrary and should not be included in the final rule.
Finally, any assessment system should take into account public housing prorations. Without full funding, an authority should not be held to the standards expected of programs consistently provided sufficient operating and capital fund budgets. In the absence of the desperately required full funding levels, we urge HUD to include prorations in their public housing assessment system.
We look forward to continuing to work with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development as we seek a fair and accurate evaluation system. Again, thank you for providing NYSPHADA with the opportunity to comment on this interim rule for public housing evaluation and oversight.
Sincerely,
Stephen V. Stone
President