25 C.F.R. § 256.7
What housing services are available?
Four categories of assistance are available under the HIP, as outlined in the following table.
| Type of assistance | What it provides | Where to find information |
|---|---|---|
| Category A | Up to $7,500 in safety or sanitation repairs to the house in which you live, which will remain substandard. Can be provided more than once, but not for more than one house and the total assistance cannot exceed $7,500. (For Alaska, freight cost not to exceed 100 percent of the cost of materials can be added to the cost of the project.) | § 256.8. |
| Category B | Up to $60,000 in renovation, which will bring your house to standard housing condition, as defined in § 256.2 of this part. Can only be provided once. (For Alaska, freight cost not to exceed 100 percent of the cost of materials can be added to the cost of the project.) | § 256.9. |
| Category C | A modest house that meets the criteria in § 256.10 of this part and the definition of standard housing in § 256.2 of this part and whose costs are determined by and limited to the criteria in § 256.19(b) and (c) of this part. Can only be provided once. (For Alaska, freight cost not to exceed 100 percent of the cost of materials can be added to the cost of the project.) | § 256.10. |
| Category D | Assistance towards the purchase of a modest house that meets the definition of standard housing in § 256.2 | § 256.11. |
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 2007–2008 · leading case: Nord v. Kelly, 520 F.3d 848 (8th Cir. 2008).
Nord v. Kelly, 520 F.3d 848 (8th Cir. 2008). “The regulations in effect at the time of the agreement required the State's right-of-way application to include a stipulation "expressly agreeing" to the terms of 25 C.F.R. § 256.7 (1951), which placed certain obligations on the party applying for a right-of-way.”
Nord v. Kelly, 474 F. Supp. 2d 1088 (D. Minnesota 2007). “Because this stipulation did not refer specifically to clauses (d) and (e) of 25 C.F.R. § 256.7 , the Tribal Court argues, it failed to comply with 25 C.”
Chad Nord v. Donald Kelly (8th Cir. 2008). “The regulations in effect at the time of the agreement required the State's right-of-way application to include a stipulation "expressly agreeing" to the terms of 25 C.F.R. § 256.7 (1951), which placed certain obligations on the party applying for a right-of-way.”
— 25 C.F.R. § 256.7(a) — 1 case
Nord v. Kelly, 474 F. Supp. 2d 1088 (D. Minnesota 2007). “Because this stipulation did not refer specifically to clauses (d) and (e) of 25 C.F.R. § 256.7 , the Tribal Court argues, it failed to comply with 25 C.”
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.