Summary#
The RESIDE Act would create a federal pilot program; it does not amend an existing Act. Its stated goal is to turn certain vacant and abandoned commercial or industrial buildings into attainable housing. The bill is not law: it has been referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
- For fiscal years 2027 through 2031, the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary may use up to $100 million of HOME program funds above $1.35 billion to award competitive grants.
- Grants would go to eligible local governments and other participating jurisdictions, not directly to building owners or people seeking housing.
- The bill defines eligible buildings by their past use and abandonment or safety status. One route requires a safety finding, notice to the owner, and at least 90 days without corrective action.
- Grant funds could pay for acquisition, demolition, hazard cleanup, site preparation, construction or renovation, and setting up or supporting community land trusts.
- HUD must give priority to applicants meeting listed conditions, including work in economically distressed communities or qualified opportunity zones. Reducing regulatory barriers can count, but changing safety and habitability rules cannot.
- HOME rules for rental, sale, and resale would apply to homes created with grants. HUD could waive some other requirements it administers, but not those related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, or the environment, and it must publicly find good cause.
What it means for you#
- Local governments and other eligible jurisdictions: They could compete for grants, in addition to their regular HOME formula allocations. If less than $100 million is available in a year, HUD must seek to maximize the number of grants. The bill does not require HUD to run the program or award grants.
- Building owners and developers: The bill does not give owners a direct right to a grant or require them to convert a building. An eligible jurisdiction could use grant funds for property acquisition and conversion costs.
- People seeking housing: A converted unit must meet the bill’s definition of “attainable housing.” This means serving households earning up to 100% of area median income if most units are affordable to households at or below 80%; or serving households up to 120% if most units are affordable at or below 60%. The bill does not create a process for individuals to apply for housing.
- Taxpayers and communities: The program could use HOME funds above the $1.35 billion threshold, potentially leaving less excess money available for other uses. The bill says these grants would not reduce a jurisdiction’s regular HOME formula allocation.
Money#
No cost estimate or fiscal analysis is in the supplied material. No publicly available information.
- HUD could use up to $100 million a year, but only from HOME funds above $1.35 billion and only if it chooses to run the program.
- The bill does not provide a separate appropriation or specify staffing needs or administrative costs.
What is unclear#
- How HUD would score applications, set deadlines, or decide grant amounts is not specified.
- The bill does not explain how “economic distress” would be measured or how HUD would apply the listed priority conditions.
- Grant amounts are set at $1 million to $10 million when $100 million is available. The bill does not state a minimum or maximum grant when less is available.
- The bill allows HUD to waive some requirements, but does not set out a process for requesting waivers or explain how HUD would decide them.
- The bill does not say how communities, current owners, or future residents would be involved in conversion decisions.
- The exact end date and any program rules beyond the stated funding years are not specified. A report to Congress would be due within 180 days after the pilot ends.
Case for#
- A possible argument for the bill is that it directs potential federal housing funds toward converting buildings that are vacant and abandoned, including properties found unsafe or subject to receivership or nuisance abatement.
- Grants could cover several major conversion costs, rather than only construction.
- Priority for projects tied to local housing plans, distressed communities, or opportunity zones could help target grants to stated local needs.
- Applying HOME rental, sale, and resale rules to converted homes could connect the new program to existing housing requirements.
Case against#
- The program is discretionary and depends on excess HOME funding, so grants are not guaranteed even if communities have eligible buildings.
- The bill gives HUD broad authority to waive requirements it administers, with public findings required but no detailed waiver process in the text.
- The bill does not set out application rules, award criteria, or oversight details, making it hard to know how grants would be distributed or monitored.
- The bill does not establish how much funding would remain for other uses of HOME funds after any grants are made.