House subcommittee hears bipartisan case to modernize HUD HOME program as funding faces cuts
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Witnesses and subcommittee leaders urged reauthorization and modernization of HUD's HOME Investment Partnerships Program, pointing to administrative burdens that slow projects and warning that proposed federal cuts would undercut affordable housing production.
House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance members convened a hearing to review a discussion draft titled the Home Reform Act and hear testimony on modernizing the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's HOME Investment Partnerships Program. Chairman Flood opened the hearing and said the panel would focus on “modern solutions to the housing shortage,” and Ranking Member Cleaver emphasized bipartisan work to update a program last authorized in 1992.
The HOME program provides block-grant gap financing used with other tools such as the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit to build and rehabilitate affordable housing. Witnesses representing state housing agencies, public housing authorities, Habitat affiliates and nonprofit developers urged streamlining rules that they said delay projects and add cost while preserving the program’s flexibility and accountability.
Allison George, director of the Colorado Division of Housing and board president of the Council of State Community Development Agencies (CASDA), described HOME as “often the first funding source in and the last piece that keeps a project together,” and gave Harvest Hill in Broomfield, Colo., as an example of a project using a $2,600,000 HOME award to support 152 affordable homes for households earning roughly 30–70% of area median income (about $42,000 to $94,000 for a four-person household in Broomfield).
Eric Oberdorfer, director of policy and legislative affairs at the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (NARO), said HOME has produced or preserved roughly 1,400,000 homes since the program began and supported millions of jobs and local economic activity, and recommended legislative changes to reduce delays and broaden eligible activities. Ellen Woodward Potts, executive director of Habitat for Humanity of Tuscaloosa (testifying on behalf of Habitat for Humanity International), and Tiffany Bohe, president of Mercy Housing California, gave on-the-ground examples of how HOME funds are used for homeownership, rental preservation and redevelopment.
Members and witnesses repeatedly flagged four statutory and regulatory requirements that they said raise costs and slow production: duplicative environmental reviews, Build America, Buy America requirements, Davis-Bacon prevailing-wage rules and Section 3 requirements. The draft legislation attached to the hearing proposes targeted changes to those rules and to program mechanics such as the 24-month commitment deadline and administrative cap.
Ranking Member Cleaver and multiple witnesses urged Congress to reauthorize and adequately fund HOME, warning that appropriations proposals that would reduce or eliminate the program would “significantly decrease our country's ability to construct affordable housing.” Cleaver said the committee had solicited more than 140 stakeholder letters and conducted stakeholder meetings to craft bipartisan proposals.
The hearing record includes written statements and examples of HOME projects and financing at the state and national levels; witnesses were asked to submit any further written responses by 08/21/2025. The subcommittee reserved five legislative days for members to submit extraneous materials for the record.