Skip to content

HUD/Vash Family choice home ownership to entreprenureship multifamily apartment business plan

June 28, 2018

ChapterLendersHanbookChapter7 (1)


Compliant and proposed court order to comply with federal housing law


California public benefit corporation & Leveraged ESOP low-income housing developer

ØThis PowerPoint builds on PowerPoints from 2010/11 that dealt with HUD/Vash homeownership and entrepreneurship

ØThis was one of my finalists to present to SC4 community college Speech and Entrepreneurship Honors classes

ØLater at UM-Flint I developed it later to embrace my spot on the Habitat for Humanity live/work home ownership wait list

ØHere in San Francisco the plan has been tweaked to become the bases for my proposal to the federal courts to set up a consent agreement with the city and the VA and  HUD to settle the HUD/Vash porting scandal and the failure to inspect and house HUD/Vash participants & the city and developers redlining of homeless vets out of home ownership opportunity’s


Our PDF document here:


HUD:Vash home ownership “San Francisco’s Inclusionary Housing Program


I Joined the @NCEO in 1984

ØLeveraged ESOP borrows funds to build senior & low-income multifamily apartments & hires contractors and subcontractors and leases those employees back to the same to do the work.

ØThe ESOP is related to a California public benefit corporation whose mission is to sell the units to HUD/Vash homeowners

ØSF San Francisco planning and home ownership departments realize that the lottery would not work well if the veteran is the homeowner

ØThe DOL through ERISA regulations does not allow an ESOP to own Real Estate holding company’s IE the Doorman and Housman could not own an apartment house. Recently, however, Hotels have set up ESOPs (SEIU Local 14)

ØIn this case the ESOP has built a property that is sold to the veteran’s utilizing the VA multifamily home loan system and does not own the property but might manage it

ØThe ESOP leverages its debt by selling mortgages to the veteran homeowner/landlord

A California public benefit ESOP Owned developer

ØThe ESOP pays down the leveraged debt with apartment sales to the HUD/Vash voucher holder and the dept becomes ESOP equity payable to the construction workers and developer staff

ØThe ESOP developer might be the realty management service provider to the building with is future cash flows

ØMortgages might be cash flows to the ESOP

ØThe HUD/Vash Vet also owns 1 or more market-rate apartment to rent out over 30 years of the life of the mortgage which is allowed under the VA multifamily loan program

ØMost likely the market rate apartment is held under a family or elder law trust to shield it from Bridge card & Medicaid & and SSI asset tests. Apartments owned with a Mortgage are not assets(yet)

ØThis program would be a long-term(30 years) plan to end poverty to veterans and their descendants

Is the city of San Francisco redlining? Statistical data says yes they are

Ø“San Francisco’s Inclusionary Housing Program requires new residential projects of 10 or more units to pay an Affordable Housing Fee, or meet the inclusionary requirement by providing a percentage of the units as “below market rate” (BMR) units at a price that is affordable to low or middle income households, either “on-site” within the project, or “off-site” at another location in the City”

ØHow to redline the class of homeless people and veterans out of the mayor’s homeownership opportunity’s & how to use the Planning commission to further redline this class?

ØCan HUD inspection of noncompliant SRO’s rent only units be used to satisfy the off-site BMR units required by “San Francisco’s Inclusionary Housing Program”?

ØThe nonprofit SRO slumlord master lease can never be a base for home ownership and there an economic incentive for these nonprofits to forcibly keep our section 8 money in their accounts

San Francisco runs a multijurisdictional housing Exclusionary program

ØStart with the Mayor’s homeless department that tells meeting attendees that HUD/Vash will permanently bar porting of housing choice vouchers.

ØForce vets in the city with vouchers into substandard unpermitted housing with fraudulent housing inspections by the housing authority & HUD/Vash(city attorney vs Wue)

ØWe set up a mayors homeownership program that uses rules to exclude self-identified vets from owning their own low-income apartments (lottery) & bar them from owning Market rate apartments as a future retirement fund, we do this because our campaign donors are the Nonprofits that now own most low-income housing.

ØWe set up minimum AMI rents that keep out the SRO folks from the tenderloin.


San Francisco steals HUD/Vash housing choice vouchers

ØCity College homeless students program directors and staff have been in attendance at city homeless department meetings for years and are witness to its request to never allow a HUD/Vash voucher to be ported into the city

ØHUD/Vash claims no one has ported a voucher into the city in the last 6 years, we have learned the above in the last 5 months

ØThis is a violation of Shapiro VS Thompson Supreme court ruling prohibiting rules by the government to take any public benefit and to prohibit travel by any citizen

ØWe claims that this is a Federal Tort and social worker malpractice claim in the amount of $450 Million against the VA.

ØWE claim HUD has failed to properly supervise the SF housing authority in inspecting units ( the Ms. WU case and the SRO case)

ØWe claim that HUD and The VA have failed to properly supervise the rights of VA multifamily home loan and HUD/Vash rights to homeownership in the city where the city and housing authority fail to enforce  them

ØThe planning commissions lottery and the housing commissions privatizing public housing would be examples of ways to thwart a porting right.

  • In the next 10 years, the city pays into a trust fund $ 90 Million that can only be used by 800 individuals who are HUD/Vash recipients to pay $100,000 each for a VA multifamily apartment(down payment) (San Francisco settlement)
  • The Housing authority under a federal supervision will port all vouchers and will facilitate home ownership using HUD/Vash vouchers to all of the 800 + plaintiffs
  • Over the next 10 years, the San Francisco housing authority will pay into a trust fund public housing lands and buildings to build vet owned mixed-use housing

800 HUD/Vash vouchers; economic impact of homeownership

Ø800 X $600,000 = $480 Million worth of Mortgages

ØTwo Market rate apartments per veteran landlord, $960 Million plus the occupied units above equals  $1,114 Million

ØUnder city rules the vets would be entitled to additional market-rate apartments do to oversubscribing  the below-market percentages of new builds so 800 vets would own 4 to 5 apartments each through time

Ø800 veteran landlords X 5 apartments each at market rates equals 4000 market rate apartments so we propose a judicial consent agreement to place all vet owned buildings into a special tax district

ØHow many Veterans live with regular HUD vouchers or in public housing? Our legal compliant extends to them as well as in they are given no choices but to live in a LIHTC building and forced to give up VA benefits

2012-7081 HUD/Vash porting regulation

2017_Payment_Standard_Revised_Website-1 How much a HUD/Vash is worth

VI-SPDAT-2.0-Single-Adults The city and the VA violate the law by using the VI SPDAT instead of the porting regulations

144_HUD-VASH_Book_WEB_High_Res_final VA HUD/Vash social workers even violate their own practice handbook

HUD-VASH Handbook updated Aug. 2016


2017 AMI-PurchaseCalcs-SFOnly_04-21-17_0 (1)

6983-Inclusionary Procedures Manual 051013


In the summer of 2016 the HUD

The right to freedom of movement and keep your social welfare benefits

Contrast with the HUD/Vash porting rules

These are the special HUD/Vash porting rules


The rules of the city of San Francisco conflict with federal VA home loan guidelines, the city requires a lottery for these apartments

The VA multifamily lending rules say we must the owner occupy

So 5 vets  together is a 14 unit apartment building…/ChapterLendersHanbookChapter7.pdf

Click to access ChapterLendersHanbookChapter7.pdf


So vets are not allowed to do this in San Francisco in violation of 5 federal housing discrimination laws and our rights to use the VA home loan and educational benefits

Vets forced to live in LITCD buildings where VA benefits must be surrendered, this is the project list

projects 2

The ban on full-time students means that you can not have education as your goal for CWT, GI bill or Voc rehab

We try to engage this topic with social media

13 October 2018












From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: