24 C.F.R. § 964.135

Resident involvement in HA management operations

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Residents shall be involved and participate in the overall policy development and direction of Public Housing operations.

(a) Resident management corporations (RMCs) may contract with HAs to perform one or more management functions provided the resident entity has received sufficient training and/or has staff with the necessary expertise to perform the management functions and provided the RMC meets bonding and licensing requirements.

(b) Residents shall be actively involved in a HA's decision-making process and give advice on matters such as modernization, security, maintenance, resident screening and selection, and recreation.

(c) While a HA has responsibility for management operations, it shall ensure strong resident participation in all issues and facets of its operations through the duly elected resident councils at public housing developments, and with jurisdiction-wide resident councils.

(d) A HA shall work in partnership with the duly elected resident councils.

(e) HAs, upon request from the duly elected resident council, shall ensure that the duly elected resident council officers as defined in subpart B of this part, and other residents in the development are fully trained and involved in developing and implementing Federal programs including but not limited to Comprehensive Improvement Assistance Program (CIAP), Comprehensive Grant Program, Urban Revitalization Demonstration, Drug Elimination, and FIC.

(f) HAs shall involve resident council officers and other interested residents at the development through education and direct participation in all phases of the budgetary process.

(g) Resident council officers shall be encouraged to become involved in the resident screening and selection process for prospective residents at the development. Those selected to perform resident screening and selection functions must be trained by the HA in resident screening and selection and must sign a legal document committing to confidentiality.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1995–2018 · leading case: United States v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth., 347 F. Supp. 3d 182 (S.D. Ill. 2018).
United States v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth., 347 F. Supp. 3d 182 (S.D. Ill. 2018). “As an initial matter, Intervenors' contentions rest on the faulty premise that the Proposed Consent Decree-merely by omission-encroaches upon the tenant opportunities contemplated by 24 C.F.R. § 964.135 , 42 U.S.C. § 1437c-1, and 12 U.”
Mungiovi v. Chicago Hous. Auth., 914 F. Supp. 207 (N.D. Ill. 1995). · cites it 2× “” 24 C.F.R. § 964.135 (c), (d). As plaintiff concedes in his supplemental memoranda, he is not the “resident council” of the Shields Apartments — the regulations require such an organization to consist of a board of at least five members.”
Mungiovi v. Chicago Hous. Auth., 901 F. Supp. 261 (N.D. Ill. 1995). · cites it 2× “24 C.F.R. § 964.135 . 5 Plaintiff then asserts that he is the “duly elected resident council” of the Shields Apartments, and that defendants have denied him the ability to participate in the management of the facility.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.