80/20 hell

[Done&Done]

In a nutshell:
-I qualified for affordable housing (80/20) in NYC
-they denied me solely because my evil boss filed me 1099 instead of W-2 (my income numbers are in the bracket either way). Not only did I lose the housing, I then had to give most of my savings to the IRS.
-developer then rejected two appeals, one following their instructions, one after getting the W-2 thing corrected.

None of this matters if there's no oversight, and there isn't. Developers get to make up their own interpretation of the rules, or rather guidelines. I've been to every branch of government. Nothing. They kick this issue to each other like a football.

It's a serious situation if you're really in the bracket ($15-20K/yr). I can't last out in skyrocket-market-rate-world. (Am disabled too -- 5% of these units are supposed to be reserved for disabled.) Funny thing: you can REALLY own your own business, make way more than the bracket, but still get in as "low-income."


For those interested, I've tried:
-appeal to the developer, like they tell ya. Waste of time.
-city council members from 3 districts (where the bldg. is, where I am meantime, and one I guess is pals w/the Speaker). No action.
-talked to Legal Aid, which says if you make the income to qualify for the building (/win the case), it's too much to qualify for the Legal Aid program
-never got through to anyone at Legal Svcs
-city council policy analyst: thinks the appeal period is bull, talked to HUD and the dev. but says his committee is preservation, not 80/20 -- says that's State.
-congressman: wrote letters to DHCR, HFA, and developer. Nothing. Then says it's up to State.
-state senator: says if IRS was involved, it's federal, so his hands are tied. (THE WHOLE (STATE-RUN) PROGRAM IS BASED ON FEDERAL TAX RETURNS!) Gives me the number for Legal Aid (see item 3 above) and a senior-citizen-only legal help center. I am not a senior citizen, but a youngish, formerly vibrant and productive member of society.
-assemblyman: tried a phone call to HFA. Got a recording (that doesn't take a message).

A lawsuit would take years. (See this for a case that's already been filed with even less grounds than I have.) Better to have a governing body look at the facts and fix it. But is there even one?

Helpful suggestions? What approach or authority am I missing?

[Landlord's Boy]

I think your congressman can do more for you if you press him.

my evil boss filed me 1099 instead of W-2

He's only supposed to do that if you're an independent contractor, I think, or if you've earned income from him other than from your job. Doesn't that mean you lost your health insurance, too? If not, I wonder if you can appeal this and say your employer filed the wrong forms. Again, your congressman should be able to help you on this.

[Done&Done]

my evil boss filed me 1099 instead of W-2

He's only supposed to do that if you're an independent contractor

Yes, he was a scumbag, and thought he could get away with it. Didn't. But I'm still hosed, this has so far lost me my one shot at stable housing.

I wonder if you can appeal this and say your employer filed the wrong forms. Again, your congressman should be able to help you on this.

Just in case it's not clear from my post, I got the W-2 thing corrected. The developer is just ignoring that.

I actually appealed both ways: once the way you suggest, and again with the correct forms in hand. I started that process before I talked to the congressman's office, and (while they supposedly have some pull with the IRS) they didn't really do anything there. So I fixed that, but even with a letter from the congressman the developers haven't responded or budged. And apparently there's no one to hold them to/interpret the rules!

[Landlord's Boy]

The value of your congressman is in sorting out who in government is responsible for what, suggesting what your next step is, and holding federal gov't personnel responsible. If he has any "pull" it is with HUD, not the IRS - and HUD is where you really need it. If you go to him with this approach, you may be more successful.

[TenantNet]

Except 80/20 is usually a NYS 421-a program, which is administered by the state or city. not federal.

[Landlord's Boy]

I'm not sure, but I think if the HUD guys assure NYS that it's OK - that no federal funding is at stake - then that NYS may be more flexible. The congressman should be able to navigate this for the OP.

[Done&Done]

Except 80/20 is usually a NYS 421-a program, which is administered by the state or city. not federal.

And this is the merry-go-round. Besides somehow convincing whoever's in the seat to prioritize your issue. They can point the finger forever.

Meanwhile, I don't think I'll be accepted for ANY legal assistance. (I saw your comment on another thread viz. "find the right lawyer, not just the first one"... I could spend all the money I have on consultations alone.)

I'm not sure, but I think if the HUD guys assure NYS that it's OK - that no federal funding is at stake - then that NYS may be more flexible. The congressman should be able to navigate this for the OP.

Wow, nice point. My brain stopped coming up with notions way before reaching this one. Certainly hope you're on to something here. I've been trying to reach HUD (or nudge the officials who were supposedly talking to them), no luck yet....

[TenantNet]

I am sure. 80/20 as it's commonly known is the 421-a program. Some are administered by DHCR and others by HPD, but it's in NYS law. There might be others out there that are HUD, or maybe even HUD signs off or has some part of it, but it's NYS. 421-a gives a sliding tax abatement to all qualifying new residential construction. If it's in certain areas of town, the building is then required to set aside 20% of the units of so-called affordable housing, the occupants being chosen by lottery. The abatement of the real estate taxes is usually sliding and tied to the life of the mortgage.

They are called neighborhood killers in that they often result in large out-of-scale buildings inappropriate for some neighborhoods and which can cause secondary displacement in an area due to too many luxury units being brought into an area. They are not to be confused with inclusionary zoning (IZ) which gives a bulk bonus, not a tax rebate, although both result in 20% alleged affordable housing. IZ is part of the NYC zoning resolution. In either case there are some housing people that buy into these programs, but in the end they end up destroying more affordable housing than they create.

Local congressmen/women might be good on the tax issues of the tenant, but I doubt they can untangle a 80/20 mess. But go ahead, try. You never know.

[Done&Done]

Local congressmen/women might be good on the tax issues of the tenant, but I doubt they can untangle a 80/20 mess. But go ahead, try. You never know.

If not them, who? State gov't people are calling it federal.

I read (elsewhere on the site) the conversation where the guy says 50/50 would be better for neighborhoods.

So far DHCR is going "can't help ya" and this happens not to be an HPD building. If it were, I think I'd be in better shape, but who knows? HFA claims it puts up the money but has nothing to do with any of the regulations or compliance. How nice for them.

Apparently all these regs, or really just guidelines, come from federal, which is HUD. One city council guy said they even administer the lotteries, which is not what it says on the DHCR site... what else aren't they telling us? And as I said, federal tax returns are the basis of everything. Is this just so state gov't can dodge when an issue comes up?

And doesn't the city council have to approve all 80/20s? So it's not like they're not involved.

[cestmoi123]

Honestly, I think this will be a tough row to hoe. So long as _somebody_ is getting that 20% allocation, getting gov't hugely concerned that you, rather than some other equally deserving person, is getting it, is going to be very tough. It's a zero-sum game, after all.

[cardinalfang]

I am sure. 80/20 as it's commonly known is the 421-a program.

"80/20" usually refers to projects that are financed with tax-exempt bonds and qualify for Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), which means the projects must folllow IRS regulations that in turn reference HUD standards and rules for tenant eligibility and income determination. See for example the NYS Housing Finance Administration's 80/20 program: http://www.nyhomes.org/home/index.asp?page=197

There are non-LIHTC projects (like those financed under NYC HDC's Taxable 80/20 program - http://www.nychdc.com/program/program_p ... a=Programs ) that don't involve IRS regulations. The OP mentioned HFA, though. It sounds like he is dealing with a HFA-regulated LIHTC project, not one of the HDC projects.

[TenantNet]

Those are -- separately -- the state and city different versions of 421-a. In many or most cases they are accompanied by HFA triple-tax-free bonds (which together with the tax abatement can provide for the government to pay for up to 60% of the cost of new luxury skyscrapers, according to one source).

There are several versions as how it all plays out and some do involve Low Income Tax Credits (which has a federal component).

There are many reports of 80/20 hell suffered by the tenants involved, but they also create significant secondary displacement depending on the area and size of the building.

[Done&Done]

It sounds like he is dealing with a HFA-regulated LIHTC project, not one of the HDC projects.

Sounds right... only you couldn't call it regulated. At all.

Honestly, I think this will be a tough row to hoe. So long as _somebody_ is getting that 20% allocation, getting gov't hugely concerned that you, rather than some other equally deserving person, is getting it, is going to be very tough. It's a zero-sum game, after all.

It has been. But they do these things in order, and throwing over an eligible applicant shouldn't happen -- in fact it looks like many people with less need get approved all the time, maybe instead of me now (cf. the "Funny thing" in OP, something I worried might be off-topic).

p.s. I see what you mean about the effects of 80/20 in the long run, so should add that this building is not bulldozing Greenpoint or anything -- this is not bringing luxury owners to a formerly affordable area. So it's one of the (maybe rare) cases where the 20% really is a wedge into the city for low-income people, not a chance for a new building in a formerly affordable area to drag in 80% worth of market-rate condos.

[TenantNet]

To put it another way -- and this is true of GP and Billyburg, when sufficient development occurs to raise the market in an area -- raising the demand an pricing, you end up losing much more affordable housing in the area than the little that you gain with an 80/20 building.

Unfortunately many so-called tenant groups are selling out on issues like this. The biggest sell-out is Vito Lopez, mostly of Bushwick, but creeping into GP and Williamsburg. It's really poverty pimping.

Also often disappearing are your local and inexpensive retail shops and restaurants. Gone are the hardware stores, barber shops and laundromats in in are the noisy nightclubs and restaurants.

[Done&Done]

Unfortunately many so-called tenant groups are selling out on issues like this. The biggest sell-out is Vito Lopez,

Great, another wasted letter.