[Peace] Fwd: to someone who doesn't understand law or has never read the Section 8 contract...

[Karen Medina]

Peace,

Actually the Section 8 situation is even less risky than accepting a personal check. The section 8 money goes directly from HUD to the landlord. It never passes through the tenant's account. 

Creditors like direct deposit, but section 8 is even more direct than direct deposit.

In spite of the increased security of the direct from HUD situation, the landlords are using this as a reason to say the line "no discrimination based on income" does not apply to Section 8. Because the Section 8 money never goes to the tenant, the landlords are saying that technically it is not "income."

Yes, Stuart is correct. The Federal section 8 program is voluntary. But the city can put into place non-discrimination rules that make it harder for landlords to turn away the poor. That is what the City of Champaign is trying to make more explicit.
 
So:
* Section 8 is voluntary.
* The City non-discrimination rule has been interpreted as including Section 8 as "income" until recently.
* There have been very few problems with discrimination under the interpretation that Section 8 is income.
* If the interpretation is changed to not see Section 8 money as income, then the landlords can and will choose not to participate in the section 8 program. 
* Part of the advantages of not participating in Section 8 could be the inspection... 

-karen medina



>That analogy's an excellent one.  And it naturally includes another important way Section 8 works (if I understand it correctly): landlords are *not* required to accept Section 8-supported tenants; they choose whether to participate in the program or not, just as shopowners can choose whether or not to accept checks.
>
>But if they do agree in general to accept Section-8 monies -- or checks -- at all, they then shouldn't discriminate based on where the money had come from.
>
>   Stuart Levy