FR-6607-N-01 Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Program—Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 Inflation Factors for Public Housing Agency (PHA) Renewal Funding

The commenter opposes the proposed adjustments to the Regional Factor Inflation Factors (RFIFs) because they argue that Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) should not be penalized for local land use and housing policies beyond their control. They contend that these changes would increase financial burdens on families and providers while failing to address the root causes of housing shortages and rising rents.

Heather Blough, Executive Director of Kitsap County Consolidated Housing Authority, opposes the proposed change to the inflation factor methodology. She argues that the proposed average does not account for local market variations and suggests that HUD should instead focus on policies housing authorities can control or on increasing housing supply through the 21st Century Road to Housing Act.

The commenter supports the proposed action but suggests specific methodology changes for calculating Fair Market Rents (FMRs) and inflation factors. They argue that HUD should use a 40% income level to determine FMRs and utilize the larger of Per Unit Costs or income change percentages for inflation adjustments.

Mauricio Sanchez, a Housing Choice Voucher participant, argues that the Renewal Funding Inflation Factor (RFIF) should not be reduced in high-cost areas due to local housing constraints. He advocates for a methodology that preserves funding for currently leased families, improves PHA accountability, and ensures transparent data usage to prevent homelessness and displacement.

The Public Housing Authorities Directors Association (PHADA) opposes HUD's proposal to modify the Renewal Funding Inflation Factor (RFIF) methodology to include factors related to local land use policies or housing supply constraints. They argue that local housing authorities have no control over these policies and that such changes would unfairly penalize agencies and the low-income households they serve.

The Housing Authority of the County of Santa Cruz opposes HUD's proposed FY2027 methodological change to the Renewal Funding Inflation Factors (RFIFs). They argue that the proposal shifts the RFIF from an objective cost-of-living adjustment to a subjective policy tool that penalizes agencies for local land-use decisions beyond their control.

A resident of Dakota County, Minnesota, opposes HUD's FY 2026 Renewal Funding Inflation Factor methodology, arguing it unfairly discounts local inflation adjustments. The commenter contends that the current formula fails to reflect actual housing costs and could harm low-income families by reducing voucher funding.

The commenter supports the proposed action but argues that HUD should improve the FY 2027 RFIF methodology by incorporating more comprehensive data, such as actual housing costs from the last two years, impacts of natural disasters, and local land use restrictions. They advocate for a more nuanced approach that accounts for regional cost-of-living factors and removes artificial caps to better support Public Housing Agencies in addressing housing shortages.