Philly Council Tries to Pin Down Homeless Funding, But Questions Linger Over Program's Prioritization of Poor Residents
City Council members are pushing Mayor Cherelle Parker's H.O.M.E. initiative – a $2 billion four-year plan to support affordable housing – over the finish line, but concerns remain about whether it will truly prioritize Philly's poorest residents.
The city's proposed budget allocates $195 million for 27 initiatives in the first year of the program, which aims to repair old units and build new ones. However, some council members are questioning whether the program is doing enough to help those with the greatest need.
One point of contention is the use of the area median income (AMI) as a determining factor in eligibility. The current AMI threshold allows residents with up to 100% of the income to qualify for the program, which has raised concerns that this could create barriers for those who truly need help.
Expanding the AMI would allow more low-income families to participate, but some council members argue that it could also divert resources away from those in greatest need. Others point out that the city is already denying over 1,000 applicants because they're just above the threshold.
Councilmember Jamie Gauthier called for clearing out existing application backlogs and prioritizing those who are struggling the most. "I don't see it being fiscally responsible to open up programs to the middle class without any prioritization of people who – but for the city's dollars – are going to be on the streets," she said.
The Parker administration maintains that AMI is just one factor in determining eligibility and argues that they're trying to serve both "have-nots" and those with a bit more income. However, some council members remain unconvinced, saying that the administration needs to do more to ensure that the program truly prioritizes the poorest residents.
Ultimately, City Council must approve the budget plan for the H.O.M.E. initiative before officials can access the funding, which is paid for by $800 million in city bonds. If approved next week, the city could start accessing the funding as early as December; if not, it will stretch into January.
City Council members are pushing Mayor Cherelle Parker's H.O.M.E. initiative – a $2 billion four-year plan to support affordable housing – over the finish line, but concerns remain about whether it will truly prioritize Philly's poorest residents.
The city's proposed budget allocates $195 million for 27 initiatives in the first year of the program, which aims to repair old units and build new ones. However, some council members are questioning whether the program is doing enough to help those with the greatest need.
One point of contention is the use of the area median income (AMI) as a determining factor in eligibility. The current AMI threshold allows residents with up to 100% of the income to qualify for the program, which has raised concerns that this could create barriers for those who truly need help.
Expanding the AMI would allow more low-income families to participate, but some council members argue that it could also divert resources away from those in greatest need. Others point out that the city is already denying over 1,000 applicants because they're just above the threshold.
Councilmember Jamie Gauthier called for clearing out existing application backlogs and prioritizing those who are struggling the most. "I don't see it being fiscally responsible to open up programs to the middle class without any prioritization of people who – but for the city's dollars – are going to be on the streets," she said.
The Parker administration maintains that AMI is just one factor in determining eligibility and argues that they're trying to serve both "have-nots" and those with a bit more income. However, some council members remain unconvinced, saying that the administration needs to do more to ensure that the program truly prioritizes the poorest residents.
Ultimately, City Council must approve the budget plan for the H.O.M.E. initiative before officials can access the funding, which is paid for by $800 million in city bonds. If approved next week, the city could start accessing the funding as early as December; if not, it will stretch into January.
but I gotta say, this H.O.M.E. initiative seems a bit murky to me... The $2 billion plan sounds ambitious, but what's the real game plan here? Are we just throwing money at the problem without making sure it reaches those who need it most?
. Can't they just be more transparent about how they're prioritizing funding? And what happens to those who are above 100% AMI but still struggling to make ends meet?
. I hope the rest of the council comes around and makes sure this program truly serves our most vulnerable citizens.
, you're trying to pin down a homeless funding plan without totally losing your minds 
! It's like trying to find a needle in a haystack while having a snack 
. Seriously though, prioritizing who gets help is key - can't have the middle class getting all the benefits while those struggling the most are left on the streets 
. The council members need to get their act together and make sure this program actually helps the people it's supposed to, not just fill some budget gaps 
. And what's with the AMI thing? It's like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole 
! Clear out those backlogs and prioritize the struggling ones already 
. If they're tryin' to help low-income famiz with affordable housing, why can't they just expand the eligibility criteria more? Like, what's the point of having an AMI threshold if it's gonna leave out people who are literally struggling? 
. I feel 4 Jamie Gauthier though - it don't make sense 2 prioritize people who are still pretty stable financially 
. I mean I get it, we need 2 support our most vulnerable citizens, but at the same time, we can't just leave them high & dry 
. Can't they just expand that AMI threshold or somethin? Like, make it so ppl with lower incomes can qualify without havin 2 stress 'bout it too much 
. I'm rootin 4 Philly, let's get this H.O.M.E. initiative done right! 
... I mean, come on council members! Can't you see that 100% AMI threshold is just gonna push more people out? It's like they're trying to make a profit off people who are struggling the most 
. We need to be supporting our own here, not making it harder for them to get help. And what's with the "middle class" part? Who even knows how many ppl fit into that category? It's all just so... confusing 
. I'm all for expanding AMI and making sure everyone gets a chance, but we need more transparency on this too. We can't just let some ppl get denied because of a few bucks 
". And don't even get me started on how many applicants are being denied because their income is just a bit too high 
. It feels like we're playing with fire here and I hope City Council does some serious number-crunching to figure this out 
. Maybe they should consider using some sort of weighted system or something? I don't know, but I'm all ears if you got any ideas 
.
If they expand the AMI threshold too much, it could actually push people out of the program that really need it. And what's with all these backlogs already? They should be focusing on clearing those out ASAP 
. It's just not fair to the ones who are literally struggling to make ends meet 
. Councilmember Jamie Gauthier makes some solid points about clearing out application backlogs and prioritizing those who are struggling the most. I hope City Council can get their act together and make sure this program actually helps people, not just a select few 
. But the Parker administration is like, "No worries, we've got this" - it's not exactly reassuring 
.
The city's plan is making me think... do we need to create more programs that can help people get back on their feet? I mean, some of these ppl are just a step away from being homeless 
. We can't keep putting people out on the streets because of some numbers game 
.
I mean, what's wrong with prioritizing those on the streets, you know? It's not like they're asking for much – just a safe place to call home. And now we're talking about diverting resources away from them because of some fancy math? Give me a break! 
. I get that we can't just open up the program to everyone, but at the same time, I don't think we should be excluding people just because they're a bit above the AMI threshold. It's like, what's the point of even trying if you're not going to make it count? 
.
