On June 1, 2016, NAHRO partnering with Housing and Development Law Institute (HDLI), Public Housing Authorities Directors Association (PHADA), Council of Large Public Housing Authorities (CLPHA), and Housing Authority Risk Retention Group, Inc. (HARRG) submitted an Amicus Curiae brief in support of the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles’s (HACLA) request for their appeal to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
HACLA reduced its Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Payment Standards and provided a flyer to all voucher holders at the time of the resident’s annual recertification. The flyer stated the effective date and that the new payment standards would not apply until the resident’s “next regular reexamination.” HACLA also held public meetings and sent a “four-week notice” to residents before the payment standard was applied. Two residents filed suit against HACLA claiming HACLA’s failure to provide understandable information about the payment standard change and its one-year application date violated the residents’ constitutional procedural due process rights and various state laws. HACLA prevailed at the trial court level. The residents appealed, and the case was sent back to the trial court. HACLA prevailed again, and the resident appealed again. At this time, the appeal court (U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit) ruled in favor of the residents with specific directions for the residents to prevail at the trial court.
Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) around the nation should have certainty about what constitutes notice when changing HCV payment standards, which the current regulation provides. NAHRO will continue to follow the progress of this case (Nozzi v. HACLA) and would like to hear from other PHAs that may be in the same situation.
Click here for NAHRO’s June 15, 2016 Monitor which contains additional analysis on Nozzi v. HACLA (members only).