Atlanta public housing rent hike "pause" could shock Section 8 stock
Why it matters: Roughly 11,000 Atlanta households will receive Housing Choice vouchers this fiscal year, according to the housing authority's budget.
The vouchers help eligible residents spend no more than 30% of their income on rent and play a vital role in keeping tens of thousands of Atlantans in their homes.
Between the lines: The rent hike pause could push some landlords to switch to market-rate tenants, short-term rentals or sales — shrinking Atlanta's supply of affordable housing and creating housing instability.
The latest: In a July 15 message to landlords, Alan Ferguson, AH's chief housing and real estate officer, said the authority would not process rent increase requests for Housing Choice Voucher Program participants with contracts renewing on and after July 1 of this year.
AH could "reconsider and reinstate" increases if Congress approves new funding or federal officials offer new guidance, Ferguson wrote in the message obtained by Axios.
Context: Public housing authorities have been put on notice to expect funding cuts after President Trump called for sweeping changes to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, including a two-year limit on housing aid, according to the Associated Press.
AH's 2026 fiscal year budget approved in early July is roughly $80 million less than the previous years' spending plan, WSB reports.
The Housing Choice Voucher Program bore the brunt of those cuts; its funding dropped from $389.7 million to $338.58 million.
Yes, but: Authority officials said their "goal is to keep our residents housed."
They declined to immediately say whether funding earmarked for rent increases would fund other AH programs or operations.
Stunning stat: Roughly 20% of Atlanta's multi-family rental housing is supported by AH assistance programs, Ferguson said.
What they're saying: Dan Immergluck, a Georgia State University professor emeritus who's studied Atlanta's affordable housing crisis for nearly two decades, told Axios the pause would make it more difficult to find landlords to accept vouchers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
8 hours ago
- Axios
Trump team rethinks Gaza strategy after six months of failure
"We need to do some serious rethinking," a visibly frustrated Secretary of State Marco Rubio told a group of hostage families on Friday after the latest round of Gaza talks broke down, two people who attended the meeting tell Axios. The big picture: Six months into his presidency, President Trump is no closer to ending the war in Gaza. The humanitarian crisis is worse than ever, negotiations are deadlocked, and the U.S. and Israel are increasingly isolated internationally. Trump campaigned on ending the war and bringing the hostages home. As it drags on, and images of starving Palestinians are shared all over the world, cracks are emerging in the MAGA base over Trump's support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's maximalist war strategy. The breakdown in ceasefire talks — which came after Hamas didn't accept the latest ceasefire terms and Israel withdrew its negotiators in protest — could be a turning point for the administration's policy. Driving the news: Trump signaled Friday that it's time for Israel to further escalate the war to "get rid" of Hamas and "finish the job." Israeli officials weren't sure whether that was a negotiating tactic or a genuine change of course from Trump — a "green light" for Netanyahu to use even more extreme military measures. "It's terrible what happened with Hamas. Tapping everybody along. We'll see what happens. We'll see what response Israel has to that. But it is getting to be that time," Trump told reporters after landing in Scotland on Friday. Behind the scenes: While meeting with hostage families at the State Department Friday, Rubio said several times that the administration needed to "rethink" its strategy on Gaza and "come to the president with new options," according to the sources. Zoom in: Over the past six months, Trump has given Netanyahu an almost free hand to do whatever he wants in Gaza — from military operations, to hostage negotiations, to the distribution of humanitarian aid. While White House officials say Trump is genuinely disturbed by the killing of Palestinians and wants the war to end, he has applied virtually no pressure on Netanyahu to end it in the last few months, according to Israeli officials. "In most calls and meetings Trump told Bibi, 'Do what you have to do in Gaza.' In some cases he even encouraged Netanyahu to go harder on Hamas," one Israeli official told Axios. The other side: Netanyahu accused the Biden administration of holding Israel back, including by limiting some arms deliveries. He claimed that once Trump took office and Israel installed a new military chief, he would finally be liberated to defeat Hamas. In private, he even put a timetable on it: three months. Trump gave Israel the 2,000-pound bombs Biden wouldn't send, along with many more weapons, and ceased any public criticism over the killing of Palestinian civilians. But the results of Israel's military operations over the last six months aren't much different than before — the Israel Defense Forces have systematically destroyed more and more of Gaza, killing thousands of Palestinians in the process, but Hamas has not been eliminated. Flashback: Trump and his envoy Steve Witkoff had a big role in reaching a ceasefire and hostage deal in January, days before the inauguration. But they allowed Netanyahu to violate that deal by not negotiating seriously on its next phase. Israel resumed the war unilaterally in March. Rubio noted in Friday's meeting that neither he nor Trump had ever liked the incremental format of the Biden-era deal, with short-term truces in exchange for the release of some hostages. A State Department official with details of the meeting said that while Rubio did indicate he did not believe the incremental approach was sustainable in the long term, both he and Trump recognized it had to be handled that way in January. Between the lines: Netanyahu preferred that format for domestic political reasons, so as not to have to commit to ending the war. Despite his reservations, Trump endorsed it during the ensuing rounds of talks, which thus far have all failed. The only exception to that failure was when Trump bypassed Netanyahu to secure the release of U.S. citizen Edan Alexander. Rubio made clear in the meeting on Friday that he still doesn't think the incremental approach is the right one and hinted that it might be time to explore a more comprehensive approach to end the war and free all the remaining hostages, according to sources in the room. Zoom out: Trump was one of the first world leaders to warn publicly that Palestinians were starving in Gaza, but he has also been far less critical than his predecessor of Israel's policies to limit the entry of aid. Trump endorsed the Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an effort to deliver aid in Gaza through a private U.S. company and not through the UN in an effort to ensure Hamas couldn't commandeer it. While the GHF did manage to get food to some of the population in Gaza, hundreds of Palestinians have been killed while making their way to the aid centers. State of play: The humanitarian situation in Gaza is at its worst point since the beginning of the war 20 months ago, with 122 Palestinians dying of starvation in recent weeks, according to the health ministry in Hamas-controlled Gaza. The Palestinian death toll since the war began stands near 60,000. Nearly all Western leaders have been urging Israel with increasing desperation to stop the fighting and allow in more aid — making Trump's "finish the job" message all the more jarring by contrast. "The humanitarian catastrophe that we are witnessing in Gaza must end now," France, Germany and the U.K. said in a joint statement Friday. "Withholding essential humanitarian assistance to the civilian population is unacceptable." The bottom line: Israel and the U.S. are together on a diplomatic island, seen by many of their allies as jointly responsible for the dire situation.
Axios
8 hours ago
- Axios
Progressive upstarts shake up 2025 mayoral races
Left-wing challengers to sitting Democratic mayors are shaking up at least four major races this year, tapping into exploding anger at the party's establishment leaders. Why it matters: The races will offer early clues into the mood of progressive voters and the direction of the Democratic Party ahead of the midterms and the 2028 election. The big picture: Zohran Mamdani's victory in New York City's Democratic mayoral primary sparked a political earthquake after the 33-year-old democratic socialist ran a grassroots campaign focused on affordability in America's largest city. His win garnered national coverage and highlighted the divisions within the Democratic Party over its direction on the war in Gaza, anti-poverty programs and public spending. He's one of many left-wing candidates from diverse ethnic backgrounds jolting Democratic cities. In Minneapolis, state Sen. Omar Fateh, another young democratic socialist, claimed the local Democratic Party's endorsement this month for mayor over two-term sitting Democratic Mayor Jacob Frey Fateh's endorsement came at a convention of party insiders, not a citywide primary that might have been more favorable to Frey, whom critics see as too cozy with police and big business. Still, the endorsement was a significant coup for left-wing activists. It was the first rebuke of a sitting mayor by party members in more than 80 years. Fateh, the son of Somali immigrants, has supported rent control since before "freeze the rent" became a Mamdani campaign slogan. In Seattle, Katie Wilson, the co-founder and general secretary of a transit advocacy group, is seeking to unseat Mayor Bruce Harrell in a nonpartisan race. Wilson says Harrell — a lawyer who previously served three terms on the city council — has been too focused on removing homeless encampments around the city while failing to provide adequate services and shelter beds. Records show Wilson has been outpacing other challengers in fundraising. In Albuquerque, N.M., Alex Uballez, a former U.S. attorney under President Biden, is challenging fellow Democratic Mayor Tim Keller, who has faced criticism over crime, development mishaps and the police chief's behavior. Uballez, the son of a Chinese immigrant mother and an L.A. Chicano musician, is running on a progressive platform that prioritizes protecting immigrants and combating income inequality. What they're saying: "People don't feel their needs represented and they want leaders who will work as hard as they do to make things better," Uballez said in a statement to Axios. Uballez said the status quo isn't working and voters are ready for a change in Albuquerque. "Locally, career politicians backed by corporate interests have presided for years over skyrocketing costs of living and out-of-control homelessness," Wilson's campaign said in a statement. Reality check: Democratic incumbents aren't going down without a fight. They are organizing other elected Democrats to help take on the progressive upstarts while dismissing the processes that fostered the progressive mavericks' rise. For example: "This election should be decided by the entire city rather than the small group of people who became delegates," Frey campaign manager Sam Schulenberg said in a statement about the Minneapolis race. Between the lines: The races show that progressive voters are fired up and looking for candidates that reflect their values, Alexis Anderson-Reed, president of the progressive civic engagement network State Voices, tells Axios. "I'm seeing our base expanding even more, and it's becoming more multi-generational, multi-racial," Anderson-Reed said. What we're watching: The reaction by the Democratic Party to the progressive upstarts could dampen or galvanize left-leaning voters ahead of the 2026 midterms.
Axios
20 hours ago
- Axios
Key decisions that will shape rural health fund
States next year will begin tapping the $50 billion rural health fund in the GOP's tax and spending law, but questions have already arisen about how the funds will be allocated — and how much they will benefit rural providers. Why it matters: The fund aims at helping rural hospitals and providers adjust to sweeping changes in how Medicaid is financed, including limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments. But important details have to be fleshed out. What they're saying: Sen. Josh Hawley, who pushed for the fund, in part to get his vote for the megabill, said CMS will need to make sure the money "flows to hospitals that need it" and are not simply "going to states in general to do whatever they want with it." "So far, so good. I liked how it was written up," Hawley said. "But we'll want to monitor closely how the agency puts it into effect." Sen. Thom Tillis, who was one of the three GOP "no" votes on the reconciliation bill, told Axios that CMS needs to "make sure it's a fair formula for rural hospitals." "I think that that pot of money looks big, but it's not really when you consider some of the economic impacts, mainly from the state-directed payments," Tillis said. "We'll be interested to see how they interpret the law." How it works: The new law allocates $10 billion annually for the next five years, starting in 2026. The law says $25 billion is to be distributed equally among all states that submit a "detailed rural health transformation plan," which could include details on how they would use the funds. Between the lines: States can apply for the aid only once, by the end of this year. If they estimate wrong, or run into unforeseen problems, they don't get another shot at it. CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz must approve each state's application by Dec. 31. CMS has discretion to distribute the other $25 billion, based on factors such as how much of the state's population is rural and the number of rural health facilities. The CMS administrator can also consider other factors deemed appropriate. Friction point: Some of that flexibility raises questions about how CMS will proceed, said Zach Levinson, director of the KFF Project on Hospital Costs. "States will also have discretion on how they distribute funds among hospitals and other providers," Levinson said. "And they maybe will steer some dollars to non-rural areas, pending CMS approval." The concern is that some states could be favored over others, or that funding will not go to providers with the greatest needs. "There are risks of this becoming a slush fund if it's not carefully attended to and if it's not focused" on actual rural hospitals, said Jackson Hammond, a senior policy analyst at Paragon Health Institute. All the money has to be distributed by 2030 and spent by 2032. That also means much of the assistance will have already been spent before the provider tax and state-directed payment provisions take effect in 2028. The $50 billion sum also is about one-third of the $155 billion in estimated cuts to federal Medicaid spending in rural areas, per a KFF analysis.
