Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Affordability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Housing and homelessness advocates press council to restore and expand emergency and production funding
Summary
Providers, tenant leaders and people with lived experience urged the County Council to fund emergency rental assistance, rapid rehousing, permanent supportive housing, and a large housing initiative fund to prevent evictions and advance affordable housing production.
Get email alerts on the Housing Affordability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Multiple speakers representing housing‑justice groups, service providers and residents urged the Montgomery County Council to commit substantially more funding to homelessness prevention and affordable housing production during the FY27 public hearing.
Jo Shifrin of Housing Justice Montgomery said the county’s budget is a “moral document” and called for $80,000,000 for emergency rental assistance, $20,000,000 for rapid rehousing, $27,000,000 for permanent supportive housing, and $182,000,000 for a housing initiative fund to preserve and produce deeply affordable homes.
Thomas Gibson, a resident of Neville Street Emergency Men’s Shelter, urged the council to treat permanent supportive housing and rapid rehousing as investments that reduce long‑term costs to emergency services and hospitals. "If we do not invest now, the costs do not go away. They multiply," he said.
Robert Goldman of MHP, the county’s largest nonprofit affordable‑housing provider, warned the council that the executive recommendation reduces preservation and production funding to about $100,000,000 for FY27—roughly $20,000,000 less than recent years—and that at least 10 projects scheduled to close in the next 12 months will be at risk if additional financing is not found.
Speakers urged tools the council could use if the executive budget is insufficient, including issuing additional revenue bonds or reallocating fund sources to avoid leaving projects “stuck in limbo.” Several tenant leaders and residents described personal experiences of eviction, long waits for vouchers and unsafe housing conditions to underscore urgency.
No formal vote or council action on these requests occurred during the hearing; advocates requested the council consider specific supplemental line items during upcoming budget deliberations.
