Trump budget proposal could tighten access to housing vouchers in Nevada
Trump budget proposal could tighten access to housing vouchers in Nevada
More than 15,000 households in Nevada rely on federally funded housing vouchers, with thousands more waiting years to access vital rental assistance.
Representatives from the local housing authorities worry many would be locked out of vouchers and other assistance under President Donald Trump's proposed budget, which calls for billions of dollars in cuts to housing programs.
'Based on our current average monthly subsidy in our Housing Choice Voucher Program, we've estimated that for every million-dollar reduction in housing assistance, it would be approximately 93 fewer households that we would be able to serve,' said Dr. Hilary Lopez, the executive director for the Reno Housing Authority.
An estimated 15,300 people in Nevada rely on housing choice vouchers, formerly known as section 8 vouchers, which provide rental assistance subsidies for low-income people, seniors and people with disabilities, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The number doesn't include other types of specialized vouchers, such as emergency solutions housing vouchers designed to pay rent for people and families at risk or experiencing homelessness.
Another 2,500 people live in public housing throughout the state, according to data from CBPP.
Trump's budget requests, which have been formed into the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' were passed overwhelmingly by House Republicans in late May and are currently being debated in the Senate.
The proposal, which aims to slash Medicaid and food assistance programs, would reduce the Department of Housing and Urban Development's budget by more than 40% amid a national housing and homeless crisis.
The cuts to homeless assistance dollars include a $27 billion reduction in funding to the State Rental Assistance Block Grant, which funds housing vouchers.
The recommendations released by the White House in May said the proposed cuts 'would encourage States to provide funding to share in the responsibility to ensure that similar levels of recipients can benefit from the block grant.'
If these proposed cuts are approved it 'would be staggering in both scale and impact,' Renee Willis, the president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition, said in a press call last week.
'Rather than preserving and strengthening the federal rental assistance program that serves as a lifeline for these communities, the budget proposed consolidating HUD's five largest rental assistance programs into a single state-run block grant,' Willis said. 'It also imposed a two-year time limit on assistance.'
She added that the budget proposal is not only 'misguided but fundamentally unjust' but that it 'abdicates the government's responsibility to address poverty and housing stability.'
While the full scope of these cuts, or the state and local impact of reductions, has yet to be determined, social service providers and local governments fear any cuts to HUD funding would reduce Nevada's already fragile social safety net to tatters.
The Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority declined to answer questions about the proposed budget cuts as well as how it currently used federal funding dollars.
'While federal funding changes are uncertain at this time, we remain laser focused on our mission to provide safe, sanitary and affordable housing to eligible residents within our jurisdictions – housing that will provide an environment that fosters independence, self-sufficiency and community pride,' Lewis Jordan, executive director of the Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority said in a statement.
Bill Brewer, the executive director for the Nevada Rural Housing Authority, said he is still waiting to see what the final budget will look like.
Any amount would mean less people in rural areas being served.
'Worst case scenario, if we took a 40% cut to our vouchers, then we would be looking at cutting about 500 households off of assistance out of our approximately 1,275 voucher holders,' he said. 'If it was just 12% or 10%, then we're still looking at losing 120 to 130 households'
'They'll simply lose their support'
The Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority currently oversees the lion's share of housing assistance, around 12,000 vouchers for low income residents.
Reno Housing Authority, which provides assistance throughout Washoe County, allocated around 2,094 housing choice vouchers last year. Nevada Rural Housing Authority oversaw about 1,100 vouchers, not including specialized housing assistance.
Reno Housing Authority relies on two main federal funding sources: $32 million from the federal government to provide housing vouchers along with $3 million to administer public housing.
'It does fluctuate on an annual basis and really depends upon federal appropriations,' Lopez said.
Of the more than 2,000 households – roughly 3,600 people – that rely on housing choice vouchers in the Reno area, Lopez said close to three-quarters of clients who receive housing choice vouchers are seniors or disabled households. The breakdown is similar for the 600 households living in a public housing unit.
Average income for those relying on housing vouchers is roughly $18,000, according to the authority's 2025 annual report.
Nevada's housing shortage and skyrocketing rent prices have made it difficult for the authority to meet the demand for services, Lopez said.
'Over the last several years, we've seen those rents consistently rise,' Lopez said. 'What that means is that the average rental subsidy that we're providing has also been increasing over time and that also impacts the number of clients that we can assist.'
The rural authority gets about $12 million for its housing choice vouchers, which funds its 1,077 vouchers throughout the rural areas. Additionally it received last year $786,340 for Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Vouchers, which provides assistance for 76 veterans experiencing homelessness.
Similar to the Reno authority, Brewer said roughly two-thirds of housing voucher recipients are elderly or disabled.
'They're not the kind of folks that can go out and get a job and take care of themselves,' he said. 'They're already living on Social Security or supplemental Social Security, and they simply can't afford a $1,500 a month rent payment. That's all the money they get in most cases.'
Demand for housing assistance is growing.
Reno's authority has about 4,000 people waiting to apply for housing vouchers while the rural authorities have 2,248 applicants waiting.
'What we try to do for households on our wait list, we try to serve them within anywhere from about 18 to 36 months,' Lopez said.
The waitlist in rural Nevada opened last year and 'within a week's time, we had about 5,000 applicants on there,' according to Brewer. 'We had to close the list.'
'It will take us at least two years, if not longer, to work through that list,' he added. 'I think we still have a couple thousand names on there that we will work through.'
Nevadans wait an average of 38 months, more than three years, to receive housing vouchers, according to 2021 data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
In addition to housing choice vouchers, communities across the country, including those in Nevada, also began receiving funding for emergency housing vouchers through the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 signed by President Joe Biden.
Funding for that is expected to be depleted by the end of 2026.
Willis from the National Low Income Housing Coalition said Trump's current budget request doesn't provide additional funding for these emergency vouchers and could 'put more than 60,000 households at risk of losing their assistance and being pushed into homelessness.'
The rural authority received $455,616 for Emergency Housing Vouchers, which support 36 people. Washoe County previously told the Nevada Current 137 people rely on emergency housing vouchers in the county.
In a 'normal year,' Brewer said the rural authority would just roll people relying on emergency housing voucher holders 'onto a regular Section 8 voucher.'
He doesn't know if that would be possible if the proposed cuts are passed.
'If our voucher program overall is cut, we won't have any room to bring those people on to the (housing choice) vouchers,' he said. 'They'll simply lose their support.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
35 minutes ago
- New York Post
Vance: ‘No interest in boots on the ground' — but bracing for poss. sleeper-cell attacks in US
Vice President JD Vance on Sunday insisted the US has no interest in putting boots on the ground in Iran — while admitting the administration is bracing for potential terror attacks from sleeper cells in America. 'We're not at war with Iran. We're at war with Iran's nuclear program,' Vance told NBC's 'Meet the Press.' 'We have no interest in a protracted conflict. We have no interest in boots on the ground,' he said. 'We didn't blow up diplomacy. 'We only took this action when it was clear, as the president said, that the Iranians were tapping us along,' the vice president said of the US strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities Saturday. 'The Iranians are clearly not very good at war. Perhaps they should follow President Trump's lead and give peace a chance if they're serious about it. I guarantee you, the president of the United States is,' Vance said. 4 Vice President JD Vance on Sunday warns Iran against retaliation. NBC 4 The Pentagon laid out a timeline for how 'Operation Midnight Hammer' unfolded against Iran on Saturday. Dept of Defense The vice president insisted Iran's network of terrorist proxies in the region is already washed up, as is its nuclear program, though comprehensive damage assessments haven't been finished. After announcing the successful military campaign late Saturday, Trump dramatically warned that any retaliation from Iran 'will be met with force far greater than what was witnessed' during the strikes on its Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan nuclear sites. Vance reiterated that warning and underscored that 'it would be the stupidest thing in the world if they' seek retribution. He also indicated that the US has been battening down the hatches just in case. 'We're, of course, doing everything that we can to keep our people safe. I think that we're prepared in the event that the Iranians do retaliate,' Vance said — before later warning about possible sleeper cells in the US. 'Unfortunately, we know that a lot of people who we don't have full accounting of were let in over the last four years under the Biden administration,' Vance said. Also among the fears of reciprocation from Iran is that Tehran could target US bases and other military assets in the Mideast or close off the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway through which about 20% to 25% of the world's oil consumption flows. 4 Vance joined President Trump in the Situation Room to monitor the strikes Saturday. The White House/X Vance said it would be 'suicidal' for Iran to try to shut the strait, particularly given the havoc that would wreak on its already beleaguered economy. But he reiterated that 'our biggest red line is the Iranian nuclear weapons.' Vance, throughout his tenure as an elected official, has staked out a staunch anti-war position. He had long been skeptical of protracted US aid to war-torn Ukraine. In March, a leaked Signal message chat revealed that he was privately apprehensive about Trump's strike against the Houthis in Yemen. Despite that, Vance was adamant Sunday that Trump is being prudent with his use of military force and that preventing Iran's theocratic regime from obtaining a nuke is within America's core interests. 'The president has actually been one of the fiercest critics of 25 years of failed foreign policy in the Middle East, which is why he did what he did: a very precise, a very surgical strike tailored to an American national interest,' Vance said. 'I don't fear that this is going to become a protracted conflict because I think that we have a president who knows what's in America's interest.' The vice president also juxtaposed Trump's use of military action against Iran with how past presidents have dealt with conflicts in the tumultuous region. 4 Top military officials are still assessing the damage done to the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant and other facilities. MAXAR Technologies 'I certainly empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of foreign entanglements in the Middle East,' he stressed. 'I understand the concern. But the difference is that back then we had a dumb president.' Shortly after news of the strikes broke, a chorus of Democrats called for Trump to be impeached, accusing him of exceeding his military authority. Even some Republicans, such as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), called the airstrikes unconstitutional. Vance, a former Ohio senator, shrugged off those concerns and stressed that 'the president has clear authority to act to prevent proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.' Earlier this year, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified before the House and Senate intelligence committees that the US intelligence community assessed that 'Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.' She later accused the media of misconstruing her words. 'They were way too close to a nuclear weapon for the comfort of the president of the United States, which is why he took this action,' Vance said of the Iranians. 'We had a narrow window of opportunity. 'We might not have been able to carry out this attack six months down the road,' he added. 'It would have been irresponsible, I think, for the president not to take the action that he did. 'What happens next is up to the Iranians,' Vance assessed at another point in the interview.
The Hill
40 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump touts ‘great unity' in GOP after Iran strikes, pushes to get ‘big, beautiful' bill done
President Trump touted the 'great unity' among Republicans following the U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, as he called on the party to focus on getting his agenda bill through to his desk. 'Great unity in the Republican Party, perhaps unity like we have never seen before,' Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Sunday. 'Now let's get the Great, Big, Beautiful Bill done. Our Country is doing GREAT. MAGA!' he added. The president's remarks come after he announced Saturday evening that U.S. forces bombed three Iranian nuclear sites and said to Iran in a social media post, 'NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!' The bombs targeted three nuclear sites in Natanz, Esfahan and Fordow, located inside a mountain. Six 'bunker buster' bombs were reportedly dropped on Fordow, while more than two dozen Tomahawk missiles were launched at the other two sites. The bombings put the U.S. directly in Iran's crosshairs for retaliation and made it an active participant in the Mideastern war, which Israel launched with airstrikes against Iran on June 13. Ahead of the strikes, news outlets had focused on the so-called 'civil war' in the GOP, between the pro-Israel foreign policy hawks and supporters who identified more with the 'America-First' agenda. Members of both groups had been publicly lobbying the president in opposite directions as he considered taking military actions against Iran. While some anti-interventionist Republicans—including Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)—still publicly criticized the strikes, most of the GOP expressed support following the announcement. The news also comes as the Senate enters a pivotal week for the president's massive agenda bill, which Republican leaders in Congress still say they hope to get done by July 4.
Wall Street Journal
41 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Standards Slip at Fort Bragg
'On Display at D.C.'s Parade: Tanks, Drones and the Military's Identity Crisis' (Review, June 14) cites President Trump's speech at Fort Bragg in which he used a group of soldiers as stage props in a piece of political theater. The authors refer to it as 'a breach of traditional decorum.' I believe it is an egregious violation of U.S. military standards of conduct. Our armed forces have sedulously separated themselves from partisan politics—and soldiers on duty, in uniform, booing or cheering remarks in a blatantly political speech are acting in contravention to those standards. One might note that politicians don't campaign on military installations; nor should they. That a politician would use soldiers in this way is profoundly disrespectful to the Constitution and to the troops who are sworn to defend it. It appears that refresher training in standards of conduct would be in order at Fort Bragg. Moreover, someone might inform the president of what type of speech or behavior is appropriate for uniformed military audiences.
