Judge halts cutoff of rental aid

Times-Picayune ^ | Saturday, June 16, 2007 | By Susan Finch

[NonValueAdded]

blood-sucking gnats. vampire gnats.

[Styria]

I think most of you failed to read the first line.

In a strongly worded ruling, a New Orleans federal judge this week ordered the Federal Emergency Management Agency to stop cutting off rental assistance to low-income Hurricane Katrina and Rita evacuees without giving them advance written notice of reasons for the action or telling them they have a right a hearing on the matter.

She didn't say FEMA has to give them aid, or keep giving it forever. She said FEMA has to tell them first before shutting them out. There's nothing in there to say that even if FEMA gave notice, it still couldn't end payments.

[ApplegateRanch]

I know he is a she. She/he...I mean, tee-hee.

[kcvl]

I know that you knew. I was being tacky.

[ClaireSolt]

I think the statute stipu;lated aid for up to 18 mo. I guess it does not apply to gnats. /s

[kcvl]

December 12, 2006

In 2005 FEMA determined, pursuant to a presidential disaster declaration, that the evacuees from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita qualified for short-term housing rental assistance under Section 403 of the Stafford Act. However, in February of this year, FEMA attempted to transfer those evacuees that were eligible to its longer-term Section 408 housing program, which provides up to 18 months of housing assistance to disaster evacuees. During this transfer process, FEMA would ultimately deny the Section 408 applications of thousands of evacuees, and after 30 days notice, terminate their Section 403 benefits.

The court ordered the aid restored retroactively, so affected families are to receive checks for past payments from Sept. 1 to now, and continued assistance until February 2007, or until FEMA gives them adequate notice of why they were ineligible. The ruling affects families mostly in Texas and Louisiana who received FEMA rental assistance.

[ApplegateRanch]

I knew that you knew that I knew.

So was I being tacky.

Speaking of tacky, I’ll bet the judge...no; I won’t go there. That is too tacky.

[BBell]

You are right. But allot of these people, not all of them, are professional slackers and know the ins and outs of the system. Between the denials of receiving written notices, when it does start happening, and the hearings it will be drug out for years to come. Allot of these people are third, fourth, and fifth generation welfare participants. But you are right in on all accounts in your post.

[BBell]

Thank you for your post. So FEMA was to give them assistance until February of 2007. And then adequate notice must be given. So by not giving them written notice adequate notice was not given. So the judge is right in her ruling.

[BBell]

I agree, the plaintiffs do have a right to a hearing. It will cost allot of tax dollars and drag out the process but they do have a right to a hearing. Its best for the Country to give these people a hearing or it could somehow set a precedence that could affect us all.

[cherry]

I've got a question....is there a limit to how much one can steal from the govt?..I mean, these people get medicaid/medicare and food stamps and free housing and they get welfare or SSi or full blown SS disability, the grand-daddy of them all and do they also get special "payments" because they lived in a rat infested hell-hole never meant for settlement?

is this costing me thousands of dollars per person each month?

[kcvl]

is there a limit to how much one can steal from the govt?

Not if you know how to game the system which many of these people have done since birth. They think nothing of it either. Their mentality is that it is owed to them (since they have no clue where it's coming from and don't really care).