• 2025 Funding and Reform Priorities: D.C. Must Choose to Support Its People

    Over the years, we have seen two categories of harmful responses when D.C. elected leaders claim, rightfully or not, that there are not enough resources to meet the pressing needs in the community: 1) cuts or underfunding of housing and human services programs, and 2) tightening of eligibility or reduction in legal rights of participants in those programs. Both of those responses reduce the number of people served without reducing the number of people in need of services, causing harm to D.C. residents.

    This year and budget season, D.C. government faces some credible and unique challenges to its local budget. While we hope that the federal obstacles will be resolved soon, it is important to recognize and remember that our D.C. elected officials still have the power to make important choices during this budget season. Each year, the mayor and D.C. Council must make critical decisions regarding which program funding is cut or increased. Which communities are prioritized and burdened within the budget is a choice.  As always, it is our duty as community members and advocates to persuade our local lawmakers to make the choice to prioritize human needs and to hold them accountable when they do not. D.C. must stand up for the needs of its residents, despite and because of the pending budget pressures.

    The Legal Clinic continues to advance advocacy that centers housing, economic, and racial justice for D.C. residents and promotes strong legal protections and enforcement. Even when resources are limited, we endeavor to uplift the real and full need of the low-income, and primarily Black, community members who struggle the most to survive and maintain their lives in D.C.

    Funding for human services and housing is (and should be) a significant percentage of D.C.’s budget because they are significant and critical resources for D.C. residents—and, even still, the funding supply is not currently enough to meet the demand. The funds and programs that keep people alive, protected, fed, and housed cannot continue to be the first and primary service provisions to be ransacked when cuts are on the horizon. D.C. residents deserve better. The mayoral administration and D.C. Council must choose better and resist reducing funds and programs that serve D.C.’s most marginalized residents.

    Funding essential programs is critical, but D.C. must also ensure that funds are being used to serve communities well. Residents must be respected and protected, the provision of human services and housing must be high-quality, and programs must be available, accessible, and legally compliant. We join our community member, Way Home, Fair Budget, and Just Recovery DC campaign partners in urging D.C. government to always choose to support and invest in its people.

    Check out Legal Clinic’s 2025 Funding and Reform Priorities and stay tuned for updates.

  • The FY25 Budget: Disappointments and Disinvestments

    On June 25th, D.C. Council concluded its FY25 budget process. The mayor’s proposed budget was, overall, disastrous for those who struggle the most to maintain and obtain housing in D.C. It underfunded or failed to fund critical housing resources and programs within the Department of Human Services (DHS), forcing D.C.’s lowest-income residents to share meager and inequitable investments. While there are a few noteworthy housing investments and D.C. Council made some progress in reducing the harm of the mayor’s original budget proposal, the final FY25 budget remains one of the most disappointing and regressive budgets for housing resources and housing justice in recent years.

    Despite data confirming the continued increase in homelessness and housing insecurity in D.C., the mayor funded no new housing vouchers and cut the primary program that stops eviction and displacement, the Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP). Primarily through the funding efforts of Housing Committee Chairman Robert White and Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, the final FY25 budget includes 619* housing vouchers (168 for individuals/451 for families) that will permanently end homelessness for those who need them. While the final number is disappointing, the investment of 619 vouchers after Mayor Bowser planned for zero new vouchers is also something to celebrate. It is far less than what D.C. actually needs to curb its crisis of unaffordability and homelessness, but the investment’s impact is clear. The new vouchers mean that hundreds of households, including nearly one thousand children, will no longer have to experience the dangers and trauma of homelessness– lives will be saved and forever changed.

    Unfortunately, in a place as well-resourced as D.C., D.C.’s budget should include many more than 619 housing vouchers (a mere twelve percent (12%) of the total recommended need)**. D.C. Council increased the mayor’s ERAP funding allocation; however, even with the increase, the FY25 ERAP funds ($26.9 million) are approximately forty percent (40%) less than this year’s local budget allocation—an amount that has already proven insufficient to serve D.C. residents in need of rental assistance. Despite the demand continuing to exceed resources, current administrative delays, and existing technical barriers to program access, the Bowser Administration is intent on decreasing funds and has indicated a desire to further restrict ERAP access next year. As homelessness and housing insecurity rise, D.C.’s FY25 budget limits the opportunities for residents to obtain permanent housing and reduces the only assistance residents can apply for to maintain their existing housing and prevent eviction.

    The overall lack of investment in ending and preventing homelessness is compounded by the Bowser Administration’s cruel and shortsighted decision to terminate 2,200 families from the failing rapid re-housing (RRH) program this fiscal year (and an additional 1,000 in FY25 and each year thereafter) without any consideration or stabilization plan for the majority of those households. Without the program’s rental subsidy, families, including approximately 5,500 children, will likely face eviction, displacement, and homelessness again. Despite knowing the impact of ousting these households, DHS has proceeded onward, and hundreds of families have been terminated since May.

    After facing much criticism for her administration’s careless planning, Mayor Bowser revealed that she asked the D.C. Housing Authority (DCHA) to dedicate 1,300 Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCVP) vouchers to the RRH families that her administration decided to terminate, an attempt to mitigate the harm that her administration chose to inflict. Though the budget process has concluded, rapid re-housing program participants continue to experience a heightened level of uncertainty about their housing security.  As of July 11th, DCHA passed a resolution to grant Mayor Bowser’s request to dedicate 1,300 federal vouchers to terminated RRH families – a remedy that would not have been necessary were it not for her administration’s decision to impose a strict time limit on families in RRH. However, DHS has made no commitment yet to extend families in the program until either the 1,300 HCVP vouchers or the newly funded FY25 vouchers are available to the families. It could take months before DCHA completes their eligibility process and families are able to lease up with the new vouchers. In the meantime, if DHS does not keep paying their rent, they will fall behind and face eviction. (Sign open letter to Mayor Bowser to keep families housed until they are transferred to vouchers here.)

    Hundreds of D.C. residents contacted the D.C. Council to request a stop to the terminations, funding of permanent housing vouchers so that families could be placed in a more appropriate program, and passage/funding of permanent legislative reform through the Rapid Re-Housing Reform Amendment Act. Despite strong advocacy from community members (participants, advocates, landlords, and providers) and nearly every councilmember naming the protection of RRH families from termination as a high priority this budget season, the D.C. Council failed to do what was necessary to safeguard housing for participants. The D.C. Council actually managed to make the program even worse by passing a Budget Support Act subtitle that removed substantive and procedural rights of participants in the program. While the offices of Housing Committee Chairman Robert White and Council Chairman Phil Mendelson worked diligently to mitigate the harm of the subtitle, the D.C. Council ultimately failed to stop the terminations or the further erosion of participants’ legal rights. We remain committed to using every single tool at our disposal to fight for and with our clients to avoid eviction and homelessness.

     

    The FY25 Budget Process is Over, but the Consequences Remain

    Mayor Bowser’s decision to prioritize slashing the funds and programming for critical human services and needs has real and debilitating consequences for D.C. residents and the homeless services system. Despite previous declarations of a commitment to ending homelessness and advancing racial equity, the FY25 budget is evidence of a continued abandonment of those ideals. At a time when housing insecurity is soaring, D.C.’s multi-billion-dollar local budget stripped the most critical agency of the resources it needs to support its lowest-income residents. The callous decisions of the Bowser Administration and the inaction of the D.C. Council, failing to reverse the administration’s harm, will result in more people losing housing opportunities and stability than gaining access to housing resources. The strong investment in public housing repairs ($57.9 million) and the full funding for the operation of the two new non-congregate shelters ($13.275 million) are notable budget inclusions. However, D.C. government’s inability to address the lack of affordable housing and the fact of increased homelessness in this budget will have a devastating impact in the coming months and year.

    Without a robust investment in housing creation and ensuring D.C. residents have access to the programs they need to maintain their lives and housing in D.C., the number of people experiencing housing instability and homelessness will increase. Without rapid re-housing program reform, DHS will continue to set low-income Black families up to fail, cycling them in and out of homelessness with unnecessary, forced, and repeated displacement. The narrative of budget austerity, sacrifice, and efficiency cannot only apply to the resources that prioritize resident needs. The unfortunate reality is that D.C. government will have to pay for its disinvestments for years to come. Amidst growing rates of homelessness, insufficient investment in permanent affordable housing and eviction prevention will result in more evictions, new encampments, and the need for increased shelter capacity.

    D.C. residents deserve better than this budget. We must continue to urge D.C. government to prioritize the basic needs of its residents, elevating the resources and investments that keep people safely and permanently housed. D.C. has the funds to meet the needs of those who struggle the most. D.C. has the ability to administer programs and resources competently, humanely, and equitably. The mayoral administration and D.C. Council must choose, allocate, and do better to align their belief in a progressive and equitable D.C. with the lived experiences of D.C.’s most marginalized residents.

     

    * 619 vouchers= 325 PSH-F, 148 PSH-I, 20 LRSP-LGBTQ, 126 LRSP

    ** Check out all of Legal Clinic’s FY25 budget funding and reform recommendations here

  • 2024 Funding and Reform Priorities

    The Legal Clinic’s 2024 Funding and Reform Priorities

     

    The oversight and budget season has begun and, once again, D.C. residents will face a challenge to having their needs recognized and prioritized in the upcoming budget. Narratives focused on themes of funding restrictions, hard decisions, and austerity are already being promoted by some throughout D.C. government in an effort to lower the expectations of community members for an equitable budget. Meanwhile, the fact is that, every year, the mayor and D.C. Council have to make hard decisions. It is our duty as community members and advocates to hold them accountable and persuade them to make the right ones. Budget choices that dismiss the real and most basic struggles and needs of D.C.’s lowest-income, Black residents should not be the default option for another year.

    The Legal Clinic continues to advance advocacy that centers housing and racial justice for D.C. residents. Budget cuts and further underinvestment in human services cannot be D.C.’s response to increasing rates of homelessness, soaring housing instability, and plummeting housing affordability. It is disingenuous for the D.C. government to emphasize restraint and scarcity in funding fundamental human needs while simultaneously and eagerly proposing funds for nonessential interests of the wealthiest residents and billionaire sports team owners. It is misguided and shortsighted for elected officials to endorse a narrowed commitment to “public safety” that centers crime prosecution and law enforcement resources while planning to decrease funding and programming that actively keeps residents and families safe, fed, protected, and housed. Ultimately, D.C. has the funds to meet the needs of those who struggle the most. The mayoral administration and D.C. Council must find the willpower to stand up for community members and remove programs that serve D.C.’s most marginalized residents from the funding chopping block.

    While some of our 2024 priorities are not specifically linked to FY25 budget funding, all of them require D.C. to commit to prioritizing fundamental resident needs and services. Funding essential programs is critical, but D.C. must also ensure that funds are being used to serve communities well. Residents must be respected and protected, the provision of human services must be high-quality, and programs must be accessible and legally compliant. We join our community member, Fair Budget, Way Home, and Just Recovery DC campaign partners in urging D.C. government to always make the decision to support and invest in its people.

    Check out Legal Clinic’s 2024 Funding and Reform Priorities and stay tuned for updates.

  • Despite a promise to end homelessness in D.C., the mayor’s proposed FY24 budget funds ZERO new housing vouchers. As you know, tenant vouchers are a crucial support for thousands of D.C. residents. The impact of no funding next year will be devastating for those who are unhoused/housing insecure.

    With such a well-resourced D.C. budget, D.C.’s lowest-income residents should not have to continue to struggle for basic resources each year.

    Tell D.C. Council to end homelessness now by funding new housing vouchers in the FY24 budget!

    Click here to take action and send an e-mail to D.C. Council!

  • It’s budget season again, and the Legal Clinic continues to advocate for budgets and laws that further housing justice for D.C. residents.  Along with our Fair Budget Coalition and Way Home Campaign partners*, we implore D.C. to “Meet the Needs” of all D.C. residents—particularly those who struggle the most to maintain their lives in the city. Recent housing investments and legislation during the height of the pandemic were crucial to minimize the harm experienced by D.C.’s extremely low-income communities. Now, many of those programs and funding sources have ended, but residents still face significant difficulties.

    Homelessness, housing instability, lack of affordable housing, and barriers to housing access exist when governments (national and local) fail to adequately invest in people. While some of our 2023 priorities are not specifically linked to FY24 budget funding, all of them require D.C. to commit to prioritizing and investing in its residents. We will certainly be checking for D.C.’s commitment to resident needs in the upcoming FY24 budget process.

    See our outlined 2023 priorities below and stay tuned for more FY24 budget updates.

    *The Legal Clinic is an active member of these coalitions, and our specific funding priorities are developed in collaboration.

    Addressing Homelessness

    Housing vouchers

    There are more than 40,000 households on the D.C. Housing Authority (DCHA) waiting list and it has been closed since 2013. The vast majority of people experiencing homelessness need permanent rental assistance to maintain housing stability in D.C. Additionally, due to recent laws providing for more opportunities for release from prison, there is an urgent need to fund housing for D.C. residents returning home and rebuilding lives post-incarceration. Recently, poor agency coordination and administration have caused unnecessary delays in housing D.C. residents and left valuable resources unused. However, even when those resources are fully and effectively distributed, the need for housing will far outstrip the resources provided.

    Our Ask:

    • Better oversight of both Department of Human Service (DHS) and DCHA to reduce bureaucracy that prolongs homelessness due to delays in distributing and utilizing vouchers
    • Increase funding for permanent voucher programs

    Budget Impact:

    Program Households Cost
    Permanent Supportive Housing-families 480

     

    $18.87M
    Targeted Affordable Housing 1920

     

    $58.4M

     

    LRSP Tenant Vouchers 800 $17.33M
    PSH-individuals 1260 $36.6M
    LRSP vouchers for returning citizens 60 $1.3M
    Total 4520 $132.5M

     

    Encampments

    The Bowser Administration has escalated its efforts to clear and remove encampments despite Biden Administration/ USICH and CDC guidance to suspend all encampment clearings. (“Clearing encampments can cause people to disperse throughout the community and break connections with service providers. This increases the potential for infectious disease spread.”) The CARE pilot and subsequent evictions, which increase clearings and establish “no tent” zones, are inhumane, dangerous, and prompted (at least, in part) by complaints from housed residents about the presence of those who are experiencing homeless in their neighborhoods. Additionally, clearings are justified and executed unilaterally by the Bowser Administration after broadly citing a “public health and safety risk” without clear metrics or policies defining what prompts that label. Erasing the visibility of homelessness does not erase homelessness. The solution to street homelessness is housing, not further displacement.

    Our Ask:

    • Immediately suspend all full encampment clearings. Instead, conduct trash-only clearings, provide additional trash cans at encampments, and maintain portable bathrooms and hand washing stations.
    • Create legislative policies that standardize requirements and definitions related to encampment evictions, establishing due process for encampment residents and minimizing opportunity for random and/or politicized encampment evictions.

    Budget impact: TBD. However, D.C. could save money by ending encampment-site evictions.

     

    Family Shelter System Eligibility Reform

    DHS is operating a family shelter intake system that is high barrier and burdensome, leaving many vulnerable families with no choice other than to continue in unsafe environments. Intake workers regularly and unlawfully deny eligibility to families, requiring extensive documentation of homelessness in violation of the Homeless Services Reform Act (HSRA) and refusing to provide lawful notices of ineligibility when denied services.

    Our Ask:

    • Amend the Homeless Services Reform Act to require a low barrier and humane family shelter and implement additional staff training so that families are not routinely and unlawfully denied.

    Budget Impact: N/A

     

    Non-Congregate Shelter Maintenance & Expansion

    Most shelters for single adults are large, congregate spaces with poor conditions. Several of them are slated for redevelopment or replacement. Two years ago, Mayor Bowser dedicated $50 million in federal funds to the future purchasing and converting of a hotel to bridge or permanent housing. D.C. should move forward with the plan to use those funds and expand that plan to convert more of its shelters into humane and private spaces.

    The Pandemic Emergency Program for Medically Vulnerable Individuals (PEP-V) has saved the lives of many people experiencing homelessness that have been medically determined to be at increased risk of serious illness or death due to COVID-19. Safe, non-congregate shelter spaces have been provided and lives have been protected. Now, DHS has announced termination of this waitlisted program that currently houses over 500 vulnerable D.C. residents without a clear plan as to how to continue safely housing them.

    Our Ask:

    • Utilize existing funds that were intended to redevelop hotels and other spaces into decent, safe, and private shelter for individuals.
    • Continue PEP-V (while legislating to achieve HSRA compliance & due process protections) and/ or create additional non-congregate shelter options for individuals.
    • Fund secure storage options to safeguard the belongings of those experiencing homelessness.

    Budget Impact: TBD

     

    Office of Migrant Services (OMS) Reform

    The Legal Clinic remains adamantly opposed to the segregated homeless services system that has been implemented by DHS pursuant to the Migrant Services and Supports Temporary Amendment Act of 2022.  Migrants to D.C. have no legal right to access even the limited services that are provided by the Office of Migrant Services. Additionally, there are no minimal quality of service standards applicable to OMS services.

    Our Ask:

    • We join the Migrant Solidarity Mutual Aid Network and the D.C. Immigrant Justice Platform in supporting amendments to the Migrant Services and Supports Temporary Amendment Act which:
    1. Either eliminate, entirely, the Title II changes to the HSRA’s definition of a “Resident of the District” or narrowly revise that definition so that it does not broadly exclude various categories of immigrants from the HSRA Continuum of Care.
    2. Establish a legal right to OMS services and shelter for all migrants who are excluded from the DHS Continuum of Care by the Title II revisions to the definition of a D.C. “resident.”
    3. Establish reasonable due process rights and procedures to protect migrants who are denied OMS services or shelter.
    4. Establish reasonable quality of service standards for the services and facilities provided to migrants by OMS.

    Budget Impact: N/A

     

    Preventing Housing Instability

    Rapid Re-housing Reform

    Rapid Re-housing has, unfortunately, become the one-size fits-all housing resource for homeless families, without regard to whether a family can ultimately maintain their housing once the subsidy ends. In 2022, in the midst of hundreds of families facing terminations for hitting an arbitrary time limit in D.C.’s rapid re-housing program, a coalition of 66 organizations and experts and hundreds of individuals demanded that the D.C. Council reform the Rapid Re-housing (RRH) program. That campaign culminated in the Rapid Re-housing Reform Amendment Act of 2022, which had ten co-introducers or co-sponsors. The bill reforms the program in a number of ways, most importantly prohibiting terminations for reaching a time limit if the family cannot afford market rent on their own, as well as ensuring that participants only pay 30% of their income in rent. It would prevent DHS from displacing homeless families from rapid re-housing due to hitting an arbitrary time limit, in recognition of the fact that rents are too high for families to pay without longer terms of assistance in D.C.  Despite previous statements to the contrary, DHS has already announced that program termination notices will start in August of this year. Passage of the pending legislation is critical.

    Our Ask:

    • Pass and fund the Rapid Rehousing Reform Amendment Act.

    Budget Impact:   TBD. However, this recommendation is closely tied to our funding asks for family housing vouchers. Every housing subsidy funded within that ask will decrease the fiscal impact of this ask.

     

    Rental Assistance

    The pandemic and associated economic recession have put tens of thousands of D.C. residents into economic crisis, unable to pay critical utilities or rent. The moratorium on evictions and utility shut offs was key to preventing a serious humanitarian crisis, as was the significant infusion of federal and local funds for rent and utility relief. Since all moratoria has been lifted, D.C. must ensure that there is adequate relief funding to prevent continued harm and keep residents housed. DHS abruptly stopped accepting ERAP applications as of March 10th and expects that all FY23 funding will be exhausted by May. ERAP must be substantially funded to meet the pressing need.

    Our Ask:

    • Ensure residents can access sufficient funds to pay back rent to prevent massive displacement, trauma, and homelessness.
    • Increase Council oversight & legislative efforts to require reporting on ERAP administration and distribution, including timelines, staffing, and delays of administering organizations, and allow applicants to request future rent (as was provided by STAY D.C.).

    Budget Impact: A minimum of $50 million in FY23 supplemental budget and a minimum of $117 million in FY24 budget.

     

    Protection and Creation of Deeply Affordable Housing

    Public Housing Preservation, Maintenance, & Oversight

    For decades, D.C. public housing residents have complained about the deplorable conditions and dilapidated buildings in which they have been forced to reside. Due to years of disinvestment and neglect, these properties are in extreme disrepair. DCHA is the largest landowner in the city and the source of the largest stock of large family units. Currently, ninety-five (95%) percent of the residents in DCHA properties are within the 0-30 percent Area Median Income (AMI) range, or extremely low income. Ninety-one (91%) percent of D.C.’s public housing residents are also Black. Currently, the D.C. Housing Authority is in the process of executing a large-scale public housing transformation process that will demolish and/or renovate several public housing properties. While any redevelopment plan is certainly about building restoration, it must fundamentally center the residents whose homes are within those buildings, now and in the future. Council must utilize its oversight abilities to do everything within its power to protect D.C.’s lowest-income residents and their access to housing in D.C.

    Our Ask:

    • Commit to a recurring $60 million that will address the substantial preservation, rehabilitation, and redevelopment needs of D.C.’s public housing properties.
    • Reintroduce the Public Housing Preservation and Tenant Protection Amendment Act of 2020 and include its language in the Budget Support Act (BSA) to memorialize DCHA’s stated commitment to its residents, ensuring that public housing residents can rightfully access the housing that is intended for them upon any property redevelopment or transformation.
    • Support thoughtful legislation that creates framework for an effective and more independent Board of Commissioners once the current Stabilization and Reform Board expires–one that is committed to DCHA’s mission of creating and providing low and extremely low housing.

    Budget Impact: $60 million annually.

     

    Deeply Affordable Housing Creation and Preservation

    D.C. continues to have an affordable housing crisis that threatens thousands of its residents. In particular, there is a dearth of deeply affordable housing in D.C. The Housing Production Trust Fund (HPTF) is the fundamental source for creating and preserving affordable housing in D.C.  Despite this fact, deeply affordable housing for those at 0-30% Area Median Income (AMI) continues to be the most underproduced. The Office of the D.C. Auditor extensively documented the failures of the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) to meet the HPTF’s statutory requirements over the life of the HPTF. In FY2020, despite an overall increase in the HPTF and a change requiring that fifty percent (50%) of the fund be used for 0-30% housing creation, only eighteen percent (18%) of the fund was used to create housing for that income level. Most recently, the Inspector General detailed that $82 million of the HPTF money meant for 0-30% AMI was misspent in 2020. In FY22, only seventeen percent (17%) of funds were used for 0-30% AMI housing creation, below even the agency’s earlier projections. Data indicates a continued failure to meet the requisite percentage of funds toward 0-30% AMI housing.

    Our Ask:

    • Maintain sufficient operating funding investment so that the full amount of 0-30% AMI affordable housing creation can be built.
    • Increase and improve Council oversight: Ensure that DHCD is compliant with all reporting requirements under the newly passed Housing Production Trust Fund Transparency Amendment Act, an important piece of legislation that increases transparency and reporting requirements.
    • Create additional legislative protections and enforcement to ensure that money meant for 0-30% AMI affordable housing creation is used as intended.

    Budget Impact: N/A

     

    Increasing Access to Housing

    Minimizing Tenant Barriers

    Too often, applicants searching for housing face unfair and unlawful barriers to housing. Last year, Council passed the Eviction Record Sealing and Fairness in Renting Amendment Act, significant legislation that creates a process for eviction record sealing, strengthens eviction provisions, and defines greater accountability, expectations, and rights within the tenant screening process. While the legislation is a monumental step towards greater housing access, there are still several barriers that must be further explored and addressed to increase access to housing, including use of credit scores, criminal records, lack of screening report accuracy standards and tenant screening company regulations, and other existing factors that contribute to a burdensome and discriminatory process for D.C.’s predominantly Black and marginalized communities.

    Budget Impact: N/A

I am a Search Dialog!