Bill Overview
Title: _____ Act of 2022
Description: [ sic ] This bill requires each owner of a covered federally assisted rental dwelling unit to ensure that all interior corridor and stairwell access doors in the building containing the unit are self-closing doors. The owner is required to maintain these self-closing doors and any inspection by the Department of Housing and Urban Development must include inspection of the self-closing doors.
Sponsors: Rep. Torres, Ritchie [D-NY-15]
Target Audience
Population: People living in or owning federally assisted rental dwelling units
Estimated Size: 12500000
- The bill affects federally assisted rental dwelling units.
- Federally assisted rental units are located throughout the United States, targeting primarily low-income households relying on housing assistance.
- Owners of these rental properties would need to comply with the new door requirements, impact includes property management and financial costs related to updating doors and maintaining them.
- Housing tenants living in these units will be impacted by either improved safety or potential inconvenience during renovations.
- The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is involved because of the inspection clause.
- Since this is US legislation, it only has direct influence within the United States.
Reasoning
- The policy targets federally assisted rental units, thus impacting primarily low-income households.
- The policy implementation involves both physical changes to properties and increased HUD inspections.
- Potential safety improvements from self-closing doors, which may reduce hazards such as fires spreading.
- Landlords may face financial strain due to upgrade costs, which may affect their willingness to maintain properties well.
- Some tenants might experience temporary disruption from renovations but could benefit from increased safety longer term.
- Not all federally assisted units would require extensive modifications, as many may already have self-closing doors.
Simulated Interviews
School Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm satisfied that this policy makes our building safer.
- The renovations could be inconvenient, but knowing it's for safety is reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Property Manager (New York, NY)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is another cost we need to figure out how to manage within our limited budget.
- Safety is important but this will affect our expenses significantly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cashier (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that makes the building safer is welcome.
- I just hope the noise and inconvenience aren't too bad during construction.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Retired (Dallas, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about the cost and if it would increase my rent one day.
- Safety is a concern, so this policy might be helpful.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Freelancer (Miami, FL)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this change is overdue for all federally assisted housing.
- It's good that the safety of tenants is being prioritized.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Software Developer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- From an investor's standpoint, increased safety measures are good for the long term.
- Initial costs could impact short-term returns, though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Student (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As long as it doesn't mean changes in our rent, I'm all for it.
- Every improvement in safety is welcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Nonprofit Worker (Detroit, MI)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy allocates necessary resources to tenant safety, which is crucial.
- We'll have to monitor the costs passed down to tenants.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Electrician (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm okay with the updates since they'll improve safety.
- Hope the implementations won't disrupt my schedule too much.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Nurse (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 75 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Safety is paramount, especially for people my age.
- I remember incidents in the past that were scary, so this is reassuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $250000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $125000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $150000000)
Year 3: $130000000 (Low: $105000000, High: $155000000)
Year 5: $135000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $160000000)
Year 10: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)
Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $160000000, High: $240000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy could introduce significant funding challenges for property owners needing large-scale, upfront investment.
- There is a balance between the initial setup costs and long-term benefits related to safety and potential cost savings.
- HUD's capacity to implement and manage the inspection processes effectively and consistently across all affected units is crucial.