Obama administration unveils plan to triple solar capacity in subsidized housing

[Judi Lynn]

Tue Jul 07, 2015 at 02:30 PM PDT.

Obama administration unveils plan to triple solar capacity in subsidized housing

by Hunter
for Daily Kos.



The Obama administration is moving forward with new projects to expand the use of ever-cheaper solar power in America. This time it's a plan to bring solar panels to America's lower and middle class, people who could greatly benefit from lower electricity bills and generally can't come up with the necessary funds to install those systems.

The administration announced that it intends to triple the capacity of solar and other renewable energy systems it installs in federally subsidized housing by 2020, make it easier for homeowners to borrow money for solar improvements and start a nationwide program to help renters gain access to solar energy, the officials said.

Also unveiled on Tuesday were commitments totaling more than $520 million from charities, investors, states and cities to pay for solar and energy-efficiency projects for lower-income communities.

Expanding the use of solar power to a broader base of Americans is critical if solar is to make a substantive dent in the nation's carbon emissions. A program targeting lower-income Americans makes good economic sense as well, because lower utility bills means more money to be spent on other family needs.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/07/1400158/-Obama-administration-unveils-plan-to-triple-solar-capacity-in-subsidized-housing?detail=facebook

(Short article, no more at link.)

[merrily]

1. Subsidized housing, ike the White House? Put Jimmy Carter's solar panels back--or

the latest version, anyway. If we had listened to Carter on this issue, we might have been energy independent by now.

[kickysnana]

2. Our subsidized Sr building only has a HUD contract until 2019.

Wonder what will happen here.

[happyslug]

3. And How is this suppose to work? Tenants pay the electric bills...

Last edited Sun Jul 12, 2015, 02:48 AM - Edit history (1)

Till Reagan, tenants of Public Housing paid no more then 25% of their income on Rent and Utilities (Utilities being defined as Heat, Water, Sewage and Electricity, i.e. NOT Phone or Cable). Under Reagan that regulation was change first "Rent and utilities will be 30%" (notice the change in language from "No More" to "will be' this was to permit Public Housing Authorities to change tenants late fees, damages fees, and court costs, which were NOT permitted under the prior rules for that would exceed 25% of income) AND permitted Public Housing Authorities to install electric meters (and other meters but the other services were hard to separate per apartment) and have the Tenant pay the Electric bill for their apartment. In exchange for this additional fee the Tenant had to pay, Public Housing Authorities were permitted to give them an 'Electric Credit" off their rent to keep their rent AND UTILITIES within the 30% federal mandate. The theory behind this was the Tenant would reduce electric use so to keep the electric bills lower then in the olden days when no matter how much electricity each tenant used, it did not affect their rent.

The problem with this is most people in Public Housing live in small apartments that do not use much electricity in the first place. Most heat is provided to the apartment complex as a whole, generally using natural gas furnaces, which also provides the hot water AND gas for the Natural gas stoves. The Complexes tended to be well insulated so in much of the country Air Conditioner is not really needed. In my area, the "Electric Credit' is generally $18 a month, and most of my clients in Public Housing have a hard time using that much electricity per month. In the South, where Air Conditioning is used more then in my area, the electric credit may NOT be enough, but in my area, the electric credit is viewed as a way to reduce the rent due.

That brings me to the problem with Obama's program. Such panels will have to be installed by the Public Housing Authorities (most of whom has just finished getting rid of Lead Paint, used in such housing when most were built between 1937 and 1971). When such panels are installed, do you continue to give the tenants the Electric Credit, or do you cut out the electric credit? i.e will this lead to an INCREASE IN RENTS TO THE TENANTS? Technically I can see Public Housing Authorities saying it will NOT, for the Tenant will be just switching from paying their electric bill themselves to going back to the Housing Authority paying the bill, thus the Tenant will NO LONGER NEED the Electric Credit, thus it will be ELIMINATED, even for those people who use electricity no what the Electric Credit amounts to. I.e. the Rent paid by each tenant will go up, to reflect the elimination of the Electric Credit on their Rent bill.

Before you said, hay it is only $18 a month. In my home county a person on Welfare only gets $174 a month on welfare for a family of one, $265 for a family of 2, $454 for a family of four. Rent would be $52.20 for one person, $79.50 for a family of two on Welfare, and $136.20 for a family of Four on welfare. Thus that $18 Electric Credit most of my client get represent 34% of the rent they have to pay as a family of one, 22% of a family of two, 13% of the rent due for a family of four.

Think about it, this program will lead to 13% to 34% increase in rent when it is use to eliminate the Electric Credit. Now, the tenant has to pay their own electric bill and it does add up so the real increase in rent will be less (i.e. the increase will be offset by no longer having to pay electric bills) but given they income it will be a substantial increase in rent AND a reduction in what they can spend for other things (like School Clothes).

Unless the issue of Electric Credit is address, this will be an unpopular program among people in public housing for it will lead to a real increase in rent, even when on paper no such rent increase in theory be incurring.