RESIDE Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Liccardo, Sam T. [D-CA-16]
- Committees
- Financial Services Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 26, 2025
Bottom line
The RESIDE Act creates a new competitive grant program to incentivize the conversion of blighted commercial and industrial properties into housing, leveraging existing HUD funding structures to address urban blight and housing shortages.
What it actually does
The Revitalizing Empty Structures Into Desirable Environments Act, or RESIDE Act, establishes a competitive grant pilot program within the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This program, active from fiscal years 2027 through 2031, allows eligible local jurisdictions to receive grants ranging from $1 million to $10 million to convert vacant and abandoned commercial or industrial buildings into attainable housing. Funding for the pilot program is contingent on the HOME Investment Partnerships Program exceeding $1.35 billion, with up to $100 million of the excess amounts being allocated to the RESIDE Act annually.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill offers a dual solution to pressing urban challenges by simultaneously tackling the proliferation of blighted commercial properties and the critical shortage of attainable housing. They contend that repurposing existing structures is a sustainable approach that can revitalize communities, reduce urban sprawl, and provide much-needed housing for working families and individuals, all while leveraging existing federal funds responsibly.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that tying the pilot program's funding to excess amounts from the HOME Investment Partnerships Program introduces significant uncertainty, potentially hindering long-term planning for local entities. They may also contend that the maximum annual allocation of $100 million is insufficient to address the widespread issues of urban blight and housing scarcity across the nation, potentially leading to limited impact despite good intentions.
The bill is concise and clearly written, making it accessible for a quick and thorough evaluation by an informed reader.
Section 2(b)
Establishment of the Blighted Building to Housing Conversion Program
This provision establishes a competitive grant pilot program, known as the "Blighted Building to Housing Conversion Program," to be carried out by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. For fiscal years 2027 through 2031, if the HOME Investment Partnerships Program's funding exceeds $1,350,000,000, up to $100,000,000 of the excess may be used to award grants to eligible entities. These grants are specifically for converting vacant and abandoned commercial or industrial buildings into attainable housing.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this program directly addresses two critical issues by providing dedicated funding to repurpose underutilized commercial spaces into much-needed housing, fostering urban renewal and sustainable development.
Critics contend
Critics might contend that the program's reliance on 'excess' HOME program funds introduces instability, making it difficult for local entities to plan long-term projects, and that the $100 million cap may be insufficient to make a significant national impact.
Tradeoffs
The program balances the desire to create new housing and revitalize communities with the fiscal constraint of not creating new direct appropriations, relying instead on conditional reallocation of existing funds.
Section 2(a)(1)
Definition of Attainable Housing
This section defines "attainable housing" for the purpose of the pilot program. It includes housing that serves households earning not more than 100 percent of the area median income (AMI), provided a majority of units are affordable to households earning 80 percent AMI or less. Alternatively, it can serve households earning not more than 120 percent AMI, if a majority of units are affordable to households earning 60 percent AMI or less. This ensures the housing created targets a specific range of income levels.
Section 2(e)
Grant Priority Criteria
This provision outlines the criteria the Secretary of HUD must use to prioritize grant applications. Priority will be given to eligible entities that plan to use the grant in economically distressed communities, in qualified opportunity zones, to address needs identified in their comprehensive housing affordability strategy (consolidated plan), or that have enacted ordinances to reduce regulatory barriers to commercial-to-housing conversion (excluding safety and habitability rules). These criteria aim to direct funds to areas with high need and to incentivize local policy reforms.
This section grants the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development the authority to waive, or specify alternative requirements for, any statute or regulation administered by the Secretary in connection with the obligation or use of covered grant funds. This waiver authority explicitly excludes requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, or the environment, and requires a public finding that good cause exists for the waiver or alternative requirement.
Section 2(h)
Why it matters:While common in pilot programs to allow for flexibility and adaptation to unforeseen challenges, such broad waiver authority can also be seen as a way to grant significant discretion to the administering agency, potentially altering the program's practical implementation without further legislative action.
Case for: Supporters argue that this flexibility is crucial for the successful implementation of a pilot program, allowing the Secretary to adapt to diverse local conditions, streamline processes, and overcome unforeseen administrative hurdles to ensure efficient use of funds and project completion.
Case against: Critics might contend that such extensive waiver authority, even with the specified exceptions, could lead to inconsistent application of rules, reduce transparency, or potentially weaken other important programmatic safeguards if not exercised with extreme caution and robust public justification.
Estimated impact: This provision could significantly influence the administrative burden and specific requirements for grant recipients, potentially accelerating or complicating projects depending on how and when the waiver authority is invoked by the Secretary.
The establishment and operation of the Blighted Building to Housing Conversion Program are contingent on the annual appropriations for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program exceeding $1,350,000,000. Only 'not more than $100,000,000 of the excess amounts' can be used to fund this pilot program for each fiscal year from 2027 through 2031.
Section 2(b)
Why it matters:This funding mechanism allows for the creation of a new program without requiring new direct appropriations, instead drawing from potential surplus funds of an existing, larger program. This makes the new program fiscally dependent and potentially less reliable, which might be a deliberate choice to manage budget optics.
Case for: Proponents would argue this is a fiscally responsible approach, ensuring the pilot program only proceeds when there are sufficient federal housing funds available, thereby avoiding additional strain on the national budget and not impacting the core HOME program's baseline funding.
Case against: Critics might contend that this conditional funding makes the program's future uncertain and subject to annual fluctuations in HOME program appropriations, which could hinder long-term planning and investment by eligible entities and reduce the program's overall effectiveness.
Estimated impact: This contingency directly determines whether the pilot program receives any funding in a given year and caps its maximum annual funding at $100 million, making it a foundational element for the program's existence and scale.