A coalition comprising national housing organizations, homebuilders, and 58 local pro-housing groups is calling on Senate leaders to advance the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act (BAAJA). They argue that the proposed permitting reforms have the potential to significantly reduce both the time and costs associated with federally supported housing projects.

In a letter addressed to key Senate committee leaders and co-led by Inclusive Abundance Action, the coalition expressed support for the housing provisions outlined in BAAJA (S. 5653), the Senate’s bipartisan package focused on permitting reform.

The groups assert that the legislation could “revolutionize the speed at which federally supported housing is constructed,” despite the majority of public attention being drawn to BAAJA’s energy and infrastructure implications instead of its capability to expedite affordable and multifamily housing initiatives.

Potential Changes to Housing Under BAAJA

Currently, affordable and multifamily housing that receives federal assistance is often subjected to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) reviews, requirements that typically do not apply to most private-sector projects. Developers of affordable housing cite delays of a year or more for environmental reviews, with an additional three-month wait just to prove that a project qualifies for an exemption, according to the coalition’s letter.

The coalition emphasizes several housing-specific alterations in BAAJA that could benefit various areas:

• Streamlined Federal Reviews: The legislation proposes that projects utilizing federal grants, loans, or loan guarantees—unless they primarily focus on preservation—should not automatically trigger a federal historic preservation review. Additionally, the bill aims to narrow the scope and streamline applicability of NEPA, permit state or Tribal reviews to replace federal evaluations, widen categorical exclusions, and establish clearer timelines.
• Cost Savings: The coalition cites that streamlined Clean Water Act reviews may lead to potential savings of up to $425,000 for each project.
• Accelerated HUD Funding Deployment: With the reforms introduced by the bill, at least $10 billion annually in funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development could be allocated more swiftly, covering programs such as Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), HOME funds, public housing capital and operational funds, and HUD loan initiatives.
• Continuation of Previous Reforms: BAAJA would build upon and expand the permitting reforms already implemented through the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which was enacted by Congress earlier this year with bipartisan support.

For developers and public housing authorities that depend on multiple layers of federal funding, these reforms would primarily impact initial approvals rather than long-term compliance. Nonetheless, the coalition argues that significantly reducing the duration of NEPA and related reviews would greatly enhance feasibility for projects on the margins and lower soft costs.

Support for the Bill

The coalition includes a diverse group of national trade organizations, think tanks, and local YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) groups. Noteworthy organizations backing the statement include:

• National Association of Home Builders
• National Community Development Association
• Council of State Community Development Agencies
• National Housing & Rehabilitation Association
• Institute for Progress
• Niskanen Center
• Center for Public Enterprise Action Fund
• Up for Growth Action
• YIMBY Action

Additionally, the coalition comprises 58 local pro-housing or YIMBY organizations from across the nation. The signed letter directed to Senate committee leaders urges lawmakers to maintain and implement the housing-related provisions within any final permitting legislation.

The Importance of This Legislation

The advocacy surrounding BAAJA underscores an increasing concern over federal permitting as a significant hurdle for subsidized housing, distinct from local zoning and entitlement risks. For developers and public agencies, the proposed reforms could lead to:

• More concise and predictable federal review timelines for projects utilizing HUD and other federal funds.
• A greater capacity to depend on state or Tribal environmental review processes rather than face redundant federal NEPA assessments.
• Reduced predevelopment and legal costs associated with compliance for environmental and historic preservation.

Related