Now we look at Colorado:
‘Lap of luxury:’ Section 8 covers Colorado rents up to $3,879 a month
https://www.thecentersquare.com/colorado/article_d4f06c07-7306-4ee3-b100-e4064fb2b78b.html
Excerpt:
.....In Colorado, the HCV program covers rents up to $3,879 per month for four-bedroom homes in the Colorado Springs ZIP codes of 80118, 80914, 80924, and 80927.
Of the 43 available four or more bedroom homes listed for rent in these ZIP codes, all but three were below the $3,879 limit.
In 80924, which includes Wolf Ranch, there are 28 homes with four or more bedrooms for rent, ranging from $2,099 per month to $4,250 per month, all but three of which are below the $3,879 per month limit. The median rent is $3,250 per month. One $3,250 example is a five bedroom, four bathroom, 3,790 square foot home including a home theater, bar, a large fenced-in yard, and three-car garage.
If a family with the average HCV household income — estimated by HUD to be $18,558 per year, or $1,546.5 per month, including other welfare payments — were to rent this home, the household’s out of pocket cost for the home is $463.95 per month. This would leave taxpayers on the hook for the other $2,786.05 per month in perpetuity, or until the admitted individual exits or is removed from the program.
According to Sepp, keeping out-of-pocket costs fixed, while allowing for portability encourages households to seek out the most expensive home they can secure, instead of trying to save taxpayers money by choosing a home they could more easily afford on their own some day.
“By fixing the out of pocket exposure, the program is defeating one of its own purposes of encouraging responsibility in housing — if you’re going to pay the same amount of money, why bother with getting somewhere that costs less?” continued Sepp.
Should a household start to make more money than the area’s maximum Section 8 income limit — which for a five-member household in Colorado Springs is $60,750 per year — the family would be forced off the program. At $60,750 per year, a household that does not want to be rent-burdened — and thus spend no more 30% of its income on rent — could only afford rent of $1518.75 per month. That is significantly less than the up to $3,879 of taxpayer-funded value provided by Section 8.
As a result, earning more money could cost Section 8 recipients their housing. To not be rent-burdened while paying $3,250 per month on rent, a household would need to make $130,000 per year, or more than double the income threshold at which a family would be removed from Section 8.
“It makes no sense,” continued Sepp. “There has to be a comprehensive, data-driven adjustment to all of these benefits.”
HUD did not respond to requests for comment.
************************
Need to either eliminate HUD or totally revamp the financial assistance HUD gives. I’m for eliminating the agency. HUD is another agency Johnson signed into law on September 9, 1965.