On behalf of the Virginia Poverty Law Center, I write in support of the Guidance Document. It offers important clarity of existing law based on a sound understanding of fair housing law more generally, making it consistent with other fair housing protections.

I have read all the comments in opposition to the Guidance Document and they show a basic misunderstanding of fair housing law. Overall, the comments in opposition argue for facially neutral policies that quite clearly have the effect of denying equal housing opportunity to many tenants receiving assistance in paying their rent. They demonstrate exactly why the Guidance Document is so necessary.

For decades, fair housing law has recognized that policies with the effect of denying equal housing opportunity to members of protected classes, even if they are neutral on their face, can violate the law.

For example, blanket rejection of tenant applicants based on any criminal history may violate fair housing laws. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) strict policies rejecting applicants based on unspecified criminal histories has the effect of denying housing to minorities who are “arrested, convicted, and incarcerated at rates disproportionate to their share of the general population.” (https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/HUD_OGCGUIDAPPFHASTANDCR.PDF)

The source-of-income protections described in the Guidance Document work no differently. A landlord's valid interest in ensuring that tenants can afford their rent is often addressed by a landlord's general policy of requiring a certain rent-to-income ratio. But countless examples have shown that tenants whose housing subsidy enables them to afford rent are denied housing by landlords' standard rent-to-income screening methods. The Guidance Document describes ways that landlords can adjust their screening methods slightly to still protect their valid business interest in ensuring tenants can afford rent, but without denying housing opportunity to tenants who receive rent subsidies.

Many of the comments opposing the guidance offer incomplete or incorrect examples of how a landlord would calculate income eligibility under the guidelines to support their inaccurate claim that the guidance requires preferential treatment to be given to some groups. We offer the following to illustrate that, to the contrary, following the Guidance Document in determining whether an applicant has adequate income to qualify for a rental results in equitable, nondiscriminatory treatment:

Two tenants apply to rent apartments that rent for $1200/month. To qualify, a tenant must earn three times the monthly rent amount or, put another way, the tenant cannot spend more than 33 1/3% of their gross income on rent. Tenant A earns $4000 per month working full-time as a paralegal. Tenant B works full-time at a grocery store earning $10/hour ($1600/month.) Tenant A pays the full rental amount of $1200, which equals 30% of their monthly wages. Tenant B has a Housing Choice Voucher and, under HCV rules, their portion of the rent is 30% of their income (or $480/month.) Since both have income that equals three times their monthly rent obligation, both qualify.

For the reasons stated and illustrated above, we support the Guidance Document as presented and encourage Virginia to implement and follow it.

                        Christie Marra, Director of Housing Advocacy, Virginia Poverty Law Center