
As Congress has left funding or policy gaps in the preservation framework for privately owned, federally assisted properties, state and local governments have enacted a variety of restrictions and incentives to fill the gaps. The restrictions include notice and purchase opportunity laws, relocation protections, or generally applicable rent controls. Incentives include property tax relief, or preferential access to state or locally controlled financing. Other programmatic initiatives, such as planning requirements or data collection, are not included here, but some are summarized in this article. The regulatory initiatives are compiled and summarized below.
Note: Certain jurisdictions have generally applicable rent control laws that cover federally-assisted housing units when they emerge from federal regulation. See, for example, the Los Angeles summary below. Such laws may provide disincentives to owners considering exiting federally-subsidized programs.
|
States: 1. California 2. Colorado 3. Connecticut 4. Illinois 5. Maine 6. Maryland 7. Massachusetts 8. Minnesota 9. Ohio 10. Rhode Island 11. Texas 12. Washington |
Cities: 1. Chicago 2. Denver 3. Los Angeles 4. New York City 5. Portland 6. Sacramento 7. San Francisco 8. Santa Cruz 9. Seattle 10. District of Columbia |