federal home loan bank of atlanta grant

In 2015 alone, $17.6 million in grant funding, leveraging nearly $300 million in first mortgage financing, assisted more than 2,400 households. NeighborWorks Columbus FHLB of Atlanta DPA Program employees for the purchase of a home. To be eligible for this employer assisted down payment grant. The City of Charlotte, in partnership with Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta, is proud to offer the Community Heroes Homeownership Program, a program for. federal home loan bank of atlanta grant

Thematic video

Federal Home Loan Bank Grant Program

Federal home loan bank of atlanta grant -

998 F.2d 214

8 IER Cases 1191

Harrell G. ANDREWS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF ATLANTA, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-2464.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Argued May 4, 1993.
Decided June 28, 1993.

Robert Mauldin Elliot, J. Griffin Morgan, Eliot, Pishko, Gelbin & Morgan, P.A., Winston-Salem, NC, argued, for plaintiff-appellant.

John Francis Wymer, III, Powell, Goldstein, Frazier & Murphy, Atlanta, GA, argued (Martin N. Erwin, Smith, Helms, Mulliss & Moore, Greensboro, NC, on brief), for defendant-appellee.

Before WILKINSON and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and MICHAEL, United States District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation.

OPINION

WILKINSON, Circuit Judge:


Advertisement

view counter
1

This case presents the question of whether a regional Federal Home Loan Bank was a government actor when it discharged one of its employees. We hold that it was not, and accordingly, we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendant.

I.

2

The Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (the Bank) is one of twelve regional banks set up by Congress under the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to provide banking services to member institution savings-and-loans. 12 U.S.C. §§ 1421-49. Services include lending to member thrifts, serving as a depository, processing of checks, and providing economic analysis. The Bank operates as a central credit facility for its members, enhancing the liquidity of the thrift industry by allowing members to secure advances against their assets, which are primarily home mortgages. See Fidelity Financial Corp. v. Federal Home Loan Bank, 792 F.2d 1432, 1434 (9th Cir.1986). The Bank receives no federal funding. 12 U.S.C. § 1438. It is a corporation whose shares are wholly owned by its member institutions and whose profits are distributed as dividends on a quarterly basis to those shareholders. 12 U.S.C. § 1426(g). Member institutions vote for eight of the fourteen directors of the Bank, 12 U.S.C. § 1427(a), and the directors are responsible for directing the Bank's affairs, including the election of the Bank president. 12 U.S.C. § 1427(j).

3

At the time of the events giving rise to this lawsuit, the Bank was supervised and regulated by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (the Board), an independent agency of the federal government. 12 U.S.C. § 1437, repealed by Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, Title VII, § 703(a), Pub.L. No. 101-73, 103 Stat. 183, 415. The Board appointed six of the Bank's directors and designated the Bank's chairman and vice-chairman. 12 U.S.C. § 1427(a), (g), repealed by Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, Title VII, § 702(a), Pub.L. No. 101-73, 103 Stat. at 413. In addition, the Board (through its authority over the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation) had the authority to examine savings-and-loans, which it had delegated to employees of the regional Home Loan Banks. See generally Dirk S. Adams & Rodney R. Peck, The Federal Home Loan Banks and the Home Finance System, 43 Bus.Law. 833 (1988).

4

In June 1987, Harrell G. Andrews was fired by the Bank from his position as a field examiner in its Charlotte office. The parties offer very different explanations for the discharge. Andrews claims that he was discharged for criticizing a change in the Bank's asset-classification policy. The Bank claims that it terminated Andrews for behavior that compromised an examination and for his failure to cooperate with Bank personnel who were charged with inquiring into that behavior. At Andrews' request, an Ombudsmen Committee appointed by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board reviewed Andrews' termination. The Committee upheld the action of the Bank.

5

After his termination, Andrews filed this lawsuit, alleging violations of the First and Fifth Amendments, along with a variety of state law claims. After removing the case to federal court, the Bank filed a motion for summary judgment, which the district court granted. The court rejected Andrews' constitutional claims because the Bank that terminated him was not a government actor. It rejected Andrews' state law claims because they were preempted by federal statute. Andrews now appeals.

II.

6

In order to establish a violation of the First Amendment, Andrews must first show that the federal government was responsible for the termination of his employment. Hudgens v. NLRB, 424 U.S. 507, 513, 96 S.Ct. 1029, 1033, 47 L.Ed.2d 196 (1976) ("It is, of course, a commonplace that the constitutional guarantee of free speech is a guarantee only against abridgment by government, federal or state."). In our constitutional scheme, state action doctrine protects the private sector from the restrictions imposed on the conduct of government. The line drawn by state action thus "permit[s] citizens to structure their private relations as they choose subject only to the constraints of statutory or decisional law." Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., --- U.S. ----, ----, 111 S.Ct. 2077, 2082, 114 L.Ed.2d 660 (1991).

7

Many of the indicia of the Bank's operations are characteristic of a private institution: the Bank is privately funded, privately owned, and it pays out its profits to its shareholders in the form of quarterly dividends. The Bank provides private banking services, such as lending money, issuing letters of credit, and serving as a trustee. The Bank's employees are not in the civil service and are not employees of the federal government. There is thus ample reason to conclude that, despite its federal charter, the Bank operates more like a private entity than as a part of the federal government. See San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. United States Olympic Committee, 483 U.S. 522, 543, 107 S.Ct. 2971, 2985, 97 L.Ed.2d 427 (1987) (holding USOC to be a private entity despite its federal charter). It is clear that Congress intended that the Home Loan Bank system be owned and operated in the main by member institutions rather than the federal government. See Hannah v. Federal Land Bank, 903 F.2d 1159, 1162 (7th Cir.1990) ("both Federal Land Bank Associations and Production Credit Associations are farmer-owned and operated agencies rather than federal instrumentalities.").

III.


Advertisement

view counter
8

Andrews nonetheless claims that the Bank's termination of him qualifies as state action, because the Bank was an agent or instrumentality of the federal government. Alternatively, Andrews claims that the Board was a joint participant in the decision to terminate him.

9

We recognize that the many private characteristics of the Bank's operations cannot end the inquiry. In certain circumstances, a private actor can still be bound by constitutional limitations because its "conduct is fairly attributable to the state." Arlosoroff v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, 746 F.2d 1019, 1021 (4th Cir.1984) (footnote omitted). In order to show state action by a private entity, however, it must be demonstrated that "the private party charged with the deprivation could be described in all fairness as a state actor." Edmonson, --- U.S. at ----, 111 S.Ct. at 2083 (citations omitted). A private party can be deemed a state actor in four contexts: (1) when the state has coerced the private actor to commit an act that would be unconstitutional if done by the state; (2) when the state has sought to evade a clear constitutional duty through delegation to a private actor; (3) when the state has delegated a traditionally and exclusively public function to a private actor; or (4) when the state has committed an unconstitutional act in the course of enforcing a right of a private citizen. If the conduct does not fall into one of these four categories, then the private conduct is not an action of the state. Applying these categories to the instant case, we find no state action in Andrews' termination.

A.

10

The first category, coercion by the state, stands for the obvious proposition that when the government orders specific conduct, it must be held accountable for that conduct. The presumption in favor of respecting the private choice of individuals is dissolved by the force of state command. "When the State has commanded a particular result, it has saved to itself the power to determine that result and ... has removed that decision from the sphere of private choice." Peterson v. City of Greenville, 373 U.S. 244, 248, 83 S.Ct. 1119, 1121, 10 L.Ed.2d 323 (1963) (state action when restaurant excluded black patrons in conformity with local ordinance); see also Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 170, 90 S.Ct. 1598, 1615, 26 L.Ed.2d 142 (1970) ("a State is responsible for the discriminatory act of a private party when the State, by its law, has compelled the act."). The application of the category of coercion may be less obvious in other cases. In Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n, 489 U.S. 602, 109 S.Ct. 1402, 103 L.Ed.2d 639 (1989), the Court found state action for Fourth Amendment purposes when federal regulations authorized railroads to test for the presence of drug or alcohol in employees who violated certain safety rules. Although the regulation was permissive on its face, the Court nonetheless concluded that state action was involved because the regulations superseded collective bargaining agreements and prohibited the railroad from divesting itself by contract of the authority to test employees. Id. at 615, 109 S.Ct. at 1412. In addition, the regulation made compliance by employees mandatory. Id. Thus, the regulation narrowed the range of private choices available under contract law to the railroad and its employees; accordingly, constitutional limitations came into play to restrain the government's power.

11

The Board's regulation of the Bank does not fall within this first category of governmental coercion. The Board can hardly be said to have coerced the Bank into terminating Andrews. The Bank made that decision on its own, and the Board became involved only when Andrews sought review from the Board's Ombudsmen Committee, long after the Bank had terminated Andrews. The Bank was established by federal statute, but that statute does not establish personnel policies for the Bank. Nor does the mere fact that the Federal Home Loan Act permitted the Bank to terminate Andrews "at pleasure" transform that termination into an act of the federal government. See Flagg Bros. Inc. v. Brooks, 436 U.S. 149, 160 n. 10, 98 S.Ct. 1729, 1735 n. 10, 56 L.Ed.2d 185 (1978) ("It would intolerably broaden ... the notion of state action ... to hold that the mere existence of a body of property law in a State, whether decisional or statutory, itself amounted to 'state action' even though no state process or state officials were ever involved in enforcing that body of law."). The Bank is extensively regulated by the Board, but regulation of an entity, standing alone, will not make a private entity an agent of the state. Moose Lodge No. 107 v. Irvis, 407 U.S. 163, 176-77, 92 S.Ct. 1965, 1973, 32 L.Ed.2d 627 (1972). The government must have compelled the act of which Andrews complains. "If the state in its regulatory or subsidizing function does not order or cause the action complained of ... there is no state action." Arlosoroff, 746 F.2d at 1022.

B.

12

The second category of state action involves cases in which the government has delegated responsibility to a private party for conduct that would be unconstitutional if done by the government. Government cannot evade constitutional duties by delegating the responsibility to a private contractor. In West v. Atkins, the state contracted with a private physician to provide medical care for its prisoners, a duty imposed on the state by the Eighth Amendment. 487 U.S. 42, 43-46, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 2252-53, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988). The physician was found to be a state actor in his care of the prisoners. Id. at 56, 108 S.Ct. at 2259 ("Contracting out prison medical care does not relieve the State of its constitutional duty to provide adequate medical treatment to those in its custody, and it does not deprive the State's prisoners of the means to vindicate their Eighth Amendment rights."). In contrast, when the state has not delegated a constitutional duty, there is no state action if the services are provided by a private contractor. See Rendell-Baker v. Kohn, 457 U.S. 830, 841-43, 102 S.Ct. 2764, 2771-72, 73 L.Ed.2d 418 (1982) (private school providing educational services to state not limited by First Amendment or Due Process in terminating teachers and counselor); Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991, 1011, 102 S.Ct. 2777, 2789, 73 L.Ed.2d 534 (1982) (private nursing home providing services to Medicaid not limited by Due Process in discharges and transfers of patients). This second category protects the presumption of individual choice for private parties, even when they act on behalf of the government, while not permitting the government to take advantage of that presumption by evading its own duties under the Constitution.

13

The Board's acts do not fit the second category for state action. While the Constitution plainly permits the federal government to supervise savings-and-loans, it places no duty on the government to do so. What may be wise as a matter of public policy is not compelled as a matter of constitutional decree. Hence the government evaded no constitutional duty by delegating the examination of thrifts to regional Bank employees. West, 487 U.S. at 56, 108 S.Ct. at 2259.

C.

14

The third category is commonly denominated the "public function" theory of state action. It encompasses the "exercise by a private entity of powers traditionally exclusively reserved to the State." Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co., 419 U.S. 345, 352, 95 S.Ct. 449, 454, 42 L.Ed.2d 477 (1974). State action via the private exercise of public functions, however, has been found only in narrow circumstances. See id. (citing Nixon v. Condon, 286 U.S. 73, 52 S.Ct. 484, 76 L.Ed. 984 (1932) (election); Terry v. Adams, 345 U.S. 461, 73 S.Ct. 809, 97 L.Ed. 1152 (1953) (election); Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501, 66 S.Ct. 276, 90 L.Ed. 265 (1946) (company town); Evans v. Newton, 382 U.S. 296, 86 S.Ct. 486, 15 L.Ed.2d 373 (1966) (municipal park)). See also Edmonson, --- U.S. at ----, 111 S.Ct. at 2086 (finding state action in the use of peremptory strikes because "a private entity becomes a government actor for the limited purpose of using peremptories during jury selection. The selection of jurors represents a unique governmental function delegated to private litigants by the government ..."; emphasis added). This third category of state action serves a purpose similar to the second, in that it prevents a state from evading the Constitution by delegation. Its reach has been "carefully confined," however, Flagg Bros., 436 U.S. at 163, 98 S.Ct. at 1737, so as not to interfere with the state's ability to contract for services not "traditionally exclusively reserved to the state."

15

The functions performed by the Bank and its employees--banking and bank examination--are not traditionally and exclusively public functions. See Morast v. Lance, 807 F.2d 926, 931 (11th Cir.1987).1 The mere fact that the Bank's "regulatory function may be of some public service lends no support to the finding of state action, for the function is not one traditionally reserved to the state." Arlosoroff, 746 F.2d at 1021. Cf. Morin v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 810 F.2d 720, 723 (7th Cir.1987) (per curiam) (Conrail held not to be a federal agency). Prior to 1932, when the Federal Home Loan Bank System was established, the federal government had no involvement in regulating the thrift industry. Paul T. Clark et al., Regulation of Savings Associations Under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, 45 Bus.Law. 1013, 1017 (1990). Even today, self-regulatory mechanisms of important industries exist alongside governmental ones. See 15 U.S.C. § 78o -3 (authorizing self-regulation of securities broker-dealers subject to Securities and Exchange Commission supervision). Important social ends are commonly accomplished through a happy mix of public and private means. For example, the function at issue in this case--the independent auditing of business and financial institutions--is often undertaken by both public and private examiners. The fact that the examiners here have been both civil service employees and employees of the Bank who lack civil service protection demonstrates the inadvisability of denominating this function an exclusively public one. See Edwin J. Gray, The Role of Regulation in the Thrift Industry, 1987 Ann.Rev.Banking L. 235, 243.2 The Bank, therefore, does not perform a function that has been traditionally and exclusively reserved to the sovereign, and we cannot regard its conduct as state action.

D.

16

The fourth category of state action limits the actions that a state can take in enforcing the rights of private individuals. When the state commits an unconstitutional act in the course of enforcing private rights, the private entity may be held accountable for invoking the state's authority. For example, when the state enforces a property right at the behest of a private entity, the state's actions may be limited by Due Process. See Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922, 924, 102 S.Ct. 2744, 2747, 73 L.Ed.2d 482 (1982) (state action found when "Clerk of the state court issued a writ of attachment, which was then executed by the County Sheriff" on basis of ex parte petition from creditor). By contrast, when a private party acts alone without the assistance of state agents to enforce property rights created by state law, no state action is involved. See Flagg Bros., 436 U.S. 149, 166, 98 S.Ct. 1729, 1738 (no state action where warehousemen sold goods, executing lien permitted by state law). There must be state action, not "mere acquiescence." Id. at 164, 98 S.Ct. at 1737; San Francisco Arts & Athletics, 483 U.S. at 547, 107 S.Ct. at 2985. This, too, is consistent with state action doctrine's protection of the private sphere: parties can contract around the permissive remedies provided by state law. When the private individual invokes the aid of the state, however, the state must act within the confines of the Constitution.

17

Under the fourth category, the Board committed no unconstitutional act in the course of enforcing the Bank's right to terminate Andrews. The Bank acted in furtherance of its statutory right to dismiss Andrews at will, 12 U.S.C. § 1432(a), and it had no need to enlist the Board to enforce that right. The Ombudsmen Committee reviewed the Bank's action at Andrews' request, not at the request of the Bank or at the direction of the Board. The Bank acting alone, not the Board, fired Andrews--the availability of post hoc review did not change this fact. Cf. Flagg Bros., 436 U.S. at 161-62 n. 11, 98 S.Ct. at 1736 n. 11 (availability of judicial review after sale under warehouseman's lien did not implicate state in original sale). The Board's decision not to interfere with the Bank's termination of Andrews thus did not make that act one of the federal government. See id. at 164, 98 S.Ct. at 1737; cf. Milburn v. Anne Arundel County Dep't of Social Serv., 871 F.2d 474, 477-79 (4th Cir.1989) (child abuse by foster parents not state action when state failed to intervene to protect child). We conclude, therefore, that Andrews' termination was the act of the Bank, and it cannot be fairly attributed to the Board or to the federal government.

IV.

18

"The directors of each Federal Home Loan Bank ... shall have power ... to select, employ, and fix the compensation of such officers, employees, attorneys, and agents ... and to dismiss at pleasure such officers, employees, attorneys, and agents...." 12 U.S.C. § 1432(a) (emphasis added). Andrews claims that the district court erred in holding his state law wrongful termination claim preempted by this federal statute. Andrews argues that his state claim supports the purpose of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to regulate the soundness of thrifts by providing protection to employees who are terminated for refusing to violate the Act or its regulations.

19

The Supreme Court has identified three situations in which federal law preempts state law: (1) when explicit statutory language preempts state law; (2) when states regulate a field that Congress intended to be completely occupied by the federal government; or (3) when state law actually conflicts with federal law. English v. General Electric Co. 496 U.S. 72, 78-79, 110 S.Ct. 2270, 2275, 110 L.Ed.2d 65 (1990). English involved a state remedy which was supplementary to the remedy provided by Congress. See id. at 89, 110 S.Ct. at 2280-81. In this case, however, Congress intended for federal law to define the discretion which the Bank may exercise in the discharge of employees. Any state claim for wrongful termination would plainly conflict with the discretion accorded the Bank by Congress. Accord Inglis v. Feinerman, 701 F.2d 97, 99 (9th Cir.1983) ("We hold that § 1432(a) permits no inroads into the 'dismiss at pleasure' language."). See also Ana Leon T. v. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, 823 F.2d 928, 931 (6th Cir.1987) ("at pleasure" language of the Federal Reserve Act, 12 U.S.C. § 341, Fifth, "preempts any state-created employment right to the contrary."). The district court therefore did not err in holding Andrews' state law claim preempted.

V.

20

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is

Источник: https://openjurist.org/998/f2d/214/andrews-v-federal-home-loan-bank-of-atlanta

Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta awards $20 million for affordable housing development nationwide

by

New white apartment houses in Berlin, Germany

With the lack of housing inventory leading to rising home prices throughout the country, affordable housing is a concern for many. In order to help alleviate that, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta announced that it will assist in funding 54 affordable housing projects across the country.

The bank awarded more than $20 million as part of its 2017 Affordable Housing Program to assist in the acquisition, new construction, rehabilitation or preservation of affordable rental and homeownership units in a number of states.

The program awards funds annually through a competitive application process to help provide housing opportunities for moderate, low- and very low-income households.

“The Affordable Housing Program helps pave the way for our members to work with developers and community groups to foster greater housing opportunities and economic development in the communities they serve,” said FHL Bank Atlanta Executive Vice President and Chief Business Officer Robert Dozier. “We are proud of the impact these funds have in helping low- and moderate-income families find affordable housing, and in building stronger local economies.”

There are five projects awarded more than $2 million in grant equity to fund 256 rental units and eight ownership units, four of which are for projects in or around Atlanta. One that is in the city is the Holly Street Apartments, which received $500,000 for 40 new rental units for older residents, primarily targeting veterans.

The other development is Phoenix House, which received $500,000 for the renovation and redevelopment in 69 rental units for formerly homeless individuals with disabilities. Phoenix House is currently located in the Atlanta Beltline, where officials are currently working to maintain affordable housing.

StateRental Units FundedOwner Units FundedAHP FundsTotal Development
Alabama160$1,185,000$21,888,219
District of Columbia64$331,857$44,610,032
Florida23740$1,912,251$21,599,506
Georgia2568$2,080,000$45,346,737
Maryland53$500,000$10,595,088
North Carolina703$3,784,595$46,833,554
South Carolina19310$650,000$28,101,856
Virginia46427$4,264,149$99,013,557
Out of District*8894$5,653,166$148,999,901
*Out of District states that received funding are Arkansas, Connecticut, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Wisconsin

Read More Related to This Post

Источник: https://atlantaagentmagazine.com/2017/06/20/federal-home-loan-bank-of-atlanta-awards-20-million-for-affordable-housing-development-nationwide/

Federal Grants for First-Time Home Buyers

House with a sold signMembers of the Federal Home Loan Bank system may get help with mortgages and other housing projects, as well as community development (which includes thrift institutions, credit unions, commercial banks, insurance companies, and approved community development financial institutions). The Federal Home Loan Bank system is made up of 11 regional banks with a total membership of about 7,300 financial institutions.

For first-time home buyers, each bank in the area offers a grant program. A first-time home buyer is defined as follows by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD):

a person who fits one or more of the following criteria:
  • A person who has not owned a primary home for the previous three years, ending on the date of acquisition of the property.
  • A spouse is included in this (if either meets the above test, they are considered first-time home buyers).
  • An individual who has been displaced from his or her house and has only possessed a primary dwelling with his or her spouse.
  • A single parent who has only ever owned a primary home with a previous spouse.
  • A person who has only held a property that did not meet state, municipal, or model building regulations and could not be brought into conformity for less than the cost of erecting a permanent structure.
  • A person who has only possessed a primary home that is not firmly attached to a permanent foundation in line with relevant regulations.

Most Federal Home Loan Bank programs are offered as a forgivable loan. Each year, 20% of the assistance grant will be forgiven. If the house is sold or refinanced within a 5 year time period, the assistance grant will be prorated and paid back to the Federal Home Loan Bank. After 5 years, the home-buyer assistance is FREE!

The money for the grants is always given out on a first-come, first-served basis. Grants are available to member banks of the Federal Home Loan Bank District. The Federal Home Loan Banks provide the grant money to applicants whose household income is at or below 80% of the area's median income. Determining household income should be left to a loan officer.

However, the following will satisfy your curiosity if you might qualify for grant money. Go to the household income lookup and select the current year. Choose the Access Individual Income Limits Area link. The next screen will prompt you to select the state. After selecting the state, select the county. The result will display the HUD median income limits. The grant programs all use 80% of the median income of household members.

Go to the household income lookup and select the current year.

Median income lookup

Choose the Access Individual Income Limits Area link

Access Individual Income Limits Area

The next screen will prompt you to select the state.

Household income limits by state

After selecting the state, select the county.
Household income by county

The result will display the HUD median income limits. The grant programs all use 80% of the median income by household members.

Household income by household members


First-time home buyer grants in Arizona, California, Nevada, and other states where bank members do business.

The Workforce Initiative Subsidy for Homeownership (WISH) and Individual Development and Empowerment Account (IDEA) programs match the down payment and/or closing expenses three to one. The Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco will match every dollar the applicant puts into the purchase for the down payment and/or closing expenses with three dollars. The Home Loan Bank will put in $9,000 if you use $3,000 to buy the house. The Home Loan Bank will match your $5,000 investment for a total of $15,000. 

First-time home buyer program for New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

If you qualify for the First Home Club grant program, the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York will not buy you a free lunch, but it will provide you with free grant money. A down payment and/or closing cost assistance grant of up to $7,500 is available to eligible home purchasers. The Federal House Loan Bank of New York will “match” the down payment/closing cost investment of the home buyer four to one. In other words, the Federal House Loan Bank will grant/gift four dollars for every dollar spent on a down payment or closing expenses by the home buyer.

For example, if a house buyer contributes $1,000 to the buying price, the FHLB will grant/gift $4,000 to the buyer. If you spend $1,880.00 on the transaction, you will get the maximum award of $7,500. The prospective home buyer(s) must establish a dedicated savings account with a participating lender and agree to save the buyer's contribution on a monthly basis for at least 10 months and up to 24 months.

First-time home buyer program for Pennsylvania, Delaware, and West Virginia.

The Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh matches grant funds three to one. The Federal House Loan Bank will give you three dollars for every dollar you invest towards the purchase of your home. For instance, if you contribute $1,000 to the purchase of a house, you will get $3,000.

The highest amount of money you can get is $5,000. If you do the arithmetic, that implies you will get $5,000 if you pay $1,667. Applicants must satisfy the income requirements. Read more about the First Front Door grant program

First-time home buyer program for Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.

You may be qualified for a $5,000 down payment and/or closing cost assistance loan from the Federal House Loan Bank of Atlanta, if you fulfill the income requirements, have not purchased a home in the last three years, and meet the standard approval standards.

The FHP (First-Time Homebuyer Product) is a four-to-one matching grant with a $5,000 maximum subsidy. The buyer must pay at least $1,000 for the purchase of the property. Each year, the government forgives 20% of the aid grant. After 5 years of ownership, there is no payback. The assistance loan does not require a monthly payment.

Also available is the Community Partners assistance program

If you satisfy the income criteria, have not bought a house in the last three years, and meet the normal approval conditions, you may be eligible for a $5,000 down payment and/or closing cost assistance loan from the Federal House Loan Bank of Atlanta.

The First-Time Homebuyer Product (FHP) is a four-to-one match grant with a maximum subsidy of $5,000. For the acquisition of the property, the buyer must pay a minimum of $1,000. The government forgives 20% of the annual assistance award each year. There is no repayment after 5 years of ownership. There are no monthly payments with the aid loan.

First-time home buyer grants for Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee.

The Federal Home Loan Bank of Cincinnati offers the Welcome Home Program.
The funding program covers the down payment and/or closing expenses up to $5,000. Each year, 20% of the assistant grant is forgiven, up to a maximum of 5 years, after which the assistance grant is forgiven.

If the house is sold or refinanced within five years of the closing date, the borrower is obliged to return all or part of the subsidy.

Homebuyers are required to put down at least $500 toward the down payment and/or closing expenses. It is not necessary for applicants to be first-time home purchasers. First-time home purchasers, on the other hand, must finish a home ownership counseling program.

First-time home buyer grants for Alaska, Guam, Northern Marianas, American Samoa, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.

The Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moine's Home$tart grant program may provide up to $7,500 to qualified home purchasers. Participants in the Home$tart Plus may be eligible for a grant of up to $15,000 in funding.

To participate in the Home$tart and Home$tart Plus programs, you must have a completed Purchase and Sale Agreement.

First-time home buyer grants for Indiana and Michigan.

The Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moine's Home $tart grant program may provide up to $7,500 to qualified home purchasers. Participants in Home $tart Plus may be eligible for a grant of up to $15,000 in funding.

To participate in the Home$tart and Home$tart Plus programs, you must have a completed Purchase and Sale Agreement. The Homeownership Opportunity Program (HOP) is offered by the Federal Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis to qualified first-time homebuyers whose family income is at or below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

With a mortgage from an FHLBank Indianapolis member, qualifying families may receive up to $8,000 in down payment and/or closing cost assistance. Applicants must put down at least $1,000 toward the purchase of the property.

The assistance grant is a three-to-one match, meaning the Federal Home Loan Bank will match every dollar the applicant puts into the purchase. If you put $1,000 toward a down payment or closing expenses, you'll get $3,000. Prior to the loan closing, the homebuyer(s) must complete a counseling/education program.

First-time home buyer program for Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, or Oklahoma.

Home $tart, a grant program run by the Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines, may give up to $7,500 to eligible home buyers. Home $tart Plus participants may be eligible for a $15,000 award.

You must have a completed Purchase and Sale Agreement to be eligible for the Home$tart and Home$tart Plus programs. The Federal Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis' Homeownership Opportunity Program (HOP) is available to eligible first-time homebuyers with a family income of less than 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).

Qualifying families may get up to $8,000 in down payment and/or closing cost assistance if they get a mortgage with an FHLBank Indianapolis member. Applicants must put down a minimum of $1,000 on the property they want to buy.

The assistance grant is a three-to-one match, which means the Federal Home Loan Bank will match every dollar invested in the purchase by the applicant. You'll receive $3,000 for putting $1,000 toward a down payment or closing costs.

A counseling/education program must be completed by the homebuyer(s) prior to the loan closing.

First-time home buyer grant for Illinois or Wisconsin.

Through its member banks, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago offers an assistance grant to qualified home purchasers in Illinois and Wisconsin. The Down Payment Plus® program matches your down payment and closing costs three to one.

That implies the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago will match the home buyer's investment with three dollars for every dollar spent on the down payment and/or closing fees. A minimum contribution of $1,000 from the borrower's own money is required toward the purchase of the house.

A maximum award of $6,000 is available.

That implies that if you put down $2,000 on a house, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago will contribute $6,000 toward the down payment, closing fees, and escrow obligations (such as property taxes and homeowner's insurance). For the house buyer's contribution, funds held in the home buyer's checking, savings, or other depository accounts for the previous two months may be utilized.

The house buyer's contribution can not be made with money that has not been confirmed.

Источник: http://www.anytimeestimate.com/home-buyer/grants-first-time-home-buyers.htm

Publications

Affordable Housing Program (AHP) Grant Applications Due July 2

Applications for the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) of Atlanta's 2012 competitive Affordable Housing Program (AHP) grants are now available. Applications are due by midnight ET July 2. Interested applicants must register on the FHLBAccess webpage to submit an application.

Approximately $13.5 million in grants will be awarded through the 2012 AHP program, with up to $500,000 awarded per project. Funding can be used to assist with the acquisition, construction, rehabilitation, and development of rental or owner-occupied housing to persons earning 80 percent or below the area's median income levels. Eligible organizations include for-profit and nonprofit housing developers, public entities, contractors, community builders, and other nonprofit or for-profit corporations and organizations in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.

Access the archived webinar on the FHLB Atlanta website to learn more about how AHP grant funding can benefit your organization. Contact the FHLB's Community Investment Services department with any questions.

Источник: https://www.atlantafed.org/community-development/publications/partners-update/2012/03/120607-affordable-housing-program-grant-applications

Sens. Warner, Kaine Announce Nearly $7 Million To Support Affordable Housing Development In Virginia

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) announced today that 18 initiatives led by local financial institutions and non-profits in Virginia will receive $6.6 million from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (FHL-Bank Atlanta)’s Affordable Housing Program (AHP) to support affordable housing development in Virginia.

“Affordable housing is one of the bedrocks of economic security and financial stability for American families,” said Sen. Warner. “These funds will provide valuable resources for existing housing networks in Virginia, which are already on the ground working to provide individuals with a place to live that is within their reach. This support will help revitalize local neighborhoods, create jobs, and encourage economic development within the Commonwealth.”

FHL-Bank Atlanta is one of the 11 regional banks in the Federal Home Loan Bank System, providing commercial banks, credit unions, savings institutions, community development financial institutions, and insurance companies within seven southeastern states, including Virginia, with a reliable source of funding for affordable home mortgages and community lending. More information on FHL-Bank-Atlanta can be found here.

The 18 awardees and programs descriptions are listed below:

Member: Burke & Herbert Bank & Trust Company. Sponsored by: Community Housing Partners Corporation. Grant: $275,000 for 55 rental units. Total Development Cost: $15,077,337.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the adaptive-reuse of five existing historic buildings within the Spring Hill Senior Community Located in Lorton, VA. Lindsay Hill will serve seniors age 62 and older and individuals with disabilities in Fairfax County.

  • Washburn Place: Marshall, VA

Member: Middleburg Bank. Sponsored by: Windy Hill Foundation. Grant: $500,000 for 30 rental units. Total Development Cost: $8,998,123.

Description: AHP funds will be used in connection with the new construction of a 30-unit family housing project in Marshall, VA. Rent for the units will be affordable to households at 40, 50, and 60 percent of the area median income.

  • Robinson Park: Harrisonburg, VA

Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Southeastern Housing Preservation, Inc.Grant: $243,909 for 88 rental units. Total Development Cost: $11,624,106.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the new construction of 88 units of affordable rental housing to families earning 50 and 60 percent of the area median income. Upon completion, Robinson Park will be EarthCraft Platinum certified.

  • The Village at Rockbridge: Lexington, VA

Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Mark-Dana Corporation. Secondary Sponsor: Virginia United Methodist Housing Development Corporation. Grant: $325,000 for 64 rental units. Total Development Cost: $4,368,570.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the rehabilitation of a 64 unit affordable apartment property in Lexington, VA. Rehabilitation will include replacement of roofing, water fixtures, cabinets, doors, flooring, windows, appliances, and HVAC units.

  • Cavalier Senior Apartments: Petersburg, VA

Member: Bank of America, National Association. Sponsored by: Humanities Foundation, Inc.Grant: $471,911 for 80 rental units. Total Development Cost: $11,686,838.

Description: AHP funds will go toward a new construction development located in the City of Petersburg, VA. The development will consist of 80 garden style apartments for seniors and will be a mix of one and two-bedroom units targeting residents at 40, 50, and 60 percent of the area median income.

  • Jackson Ward Senior: Richmond, VA

Member: Capital One, National Association. Sponsored by: Community Housing Inc.. Grant: $500,000 for 72 rental units. Total Development Cost: $13,757,488.

Description: The Jackson ward Senior building is part of the multiphase redevelopment of a low income senior public housing site in Richmond, VA. The new building will contain 72 one bedroom units and will be built to Earth Craft Platinum standards.

  • New Clay House II: Richmond, VA

Member: Union Bank & Trust. Sponsored by: Virginia Supportive Housing. Grant: $500,00 for 80 rental units. Total Development Cost: $14,845,886.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the renovation and expansion of an affordable housing development for formerly homeless individuals in Richmond. After the renovation and expansion, at least 55 units will be reserved for formerly homeless individuals and the remaining units will be reserved for individuals earning at or below 50 percent of the area median income.

  • Creekside Manor: Henrico, VA
    Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Mark-Dana Corporation. Secondary Sponsor: Virginia United Methodist Housing Development Corporation. Grant: $500,000 for 97 rental units. Total Development Cost: $7,448,920.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the rehabilitation of a 97-unit affordable apartment property in Henrico, VA. Rehabilitation will include replacement of roofing, water fixtures, cabinets, doors, flooring, windows, appliances, and HVAC units.

  • Village Green: Gloucester, VA

Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Southeastern Housing Preservation, Inc.Grant: $168,736 for 32 rental units. Total Development Cost: $3,227,197.

Description: Village Green consists of the acquisition and rehabilitation of 32 existing multi-family units. Rehabilitation will include new windows, HVAC, water heaters, appliances, roofs, siding, flooring, and improvements to accessibility. Upon completion, the property will be EarthCraft certified.

  • Cypress Landing: Chesapeake, VA

Member: TowneBank. Sponsored by: Second Act Communities. Grant: $500,000 for 50 rental units. Total Development Cost: $10,448,624.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the construction of an apartment development containing 44 one-bedroom units and six two-bedroom units. The development will serve very low-income disabled and/or homeless veterans. Thirty-eight units will serve veterans who have incomes at or below 30 percent of the area median income and the remaining 12 units will serve veterans who have incomes at or below 50 percent of the area median income.

Member: The Old Point National Bank of Phoebus. Sponsored by: Hampton Redevelopment and Housing Authority. Grant: $500,000 for 48 rental units. Total Development Cost: $9,466,152.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the construction of a 48-unit affordable senior independent housing development consisting of garden style apartments. The development will include housing for elderly veterans.

  • Ada Park: Newport News, VA

Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Southeastern Housing Preservation, Inc.Grant: $202,295 for 42 rental units. Total Development Cost: $7,998,558.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the construction of an affordable housing development which will provide 42 units of rental housing to families earning below 65 percent of the area median income.

  • Belleville Meadows: Suffolk, VA

Member: Capital One, National Association. Sponsored by: Community Housing Partners Corporation. Grant: $300,000 for 128 rental units. Total Development Cost: $14,322,493.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the rehabilitation of an existing affordable housing development in Suffolk, VA. Rehabilitation will include new flooring, roofing, energy efficient windows, kitchen appliances, faucets, and showerheads.

  • Dale Homes Phase I: Portsmouth, VA

Member: TowneBank. Sponsored by: Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority. Grant: $500,000 for 146 rental units. Total Development Cost: $22,907,475.

Description: AHP funds will be used in connection with the acquisition and rehabilitation of an existing 146 unit public housing development known as Dale Homes Phase I and will be targeted to very low income families in Portsmouth, VA. The project involves the conversion of public housing units under the Rental Assistance Demonstration program.

  • Dale Homes Phase II: Portsmouth, VA

Member: TowneBank. Sponsored by: Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority. Grant: $500,000 for 150 rental units. Total Development Cost: $23,494,499.

Description: AHP funds will be used in connection with the acquisition and rehabilitation of an existing 150-unit public housing development known as Dale Homes Phase II, and will be targeted to very low income families in Portsmouth, VA. The project involves the conversion of public housing units under the Rental Assistance Demonstration program.

  • Homeownership and Hope- Virginia: various sites, VA

Member: Union Bank & Trust. Sponsored by: Greater Lynchburg Habitat for Humanity (*). Secondary Sponsors: Habitat for Humanity in the Roanoke Valley and Farmville Area Habitat for Humanity, Inc. Grant: $199,500 for 20 ownership units. Total Development Cost: $3,380,305

Description: AHP funds will be used for the construction and rehabilitation of single family homes across Virginia. Eleven of the units will be new construction and nine will be rehabilitation of existing and vacant houses.

  • Greater Charlottesville Habitat for Humanity: Charlottesville, VA

Member: Union Bank & Trust. Sponsored by: Greater Charlottesville Habitat for Humanity. Grant: $186,200 for 19 ownership units. Total Development Cost: $3,003,788.

Description: AHP funds will go for the construction of single family homes in Charlottesville, Virginia. Habitat for Humanity reserves at least 25 percent of its homeownership opportunities for residents of public housing or who have with Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Housing Choice vouchers. All of the proposed new homes are accessible with at least one no-step entryway and are built to ENERGY STAR® 3 specifications.

  • Sun Valley Landings: Dublin and Radford, VA

Member: Union Bank & Trust. Sponsored by: Community Housing Partners Corporation. Grant: $246,333 for 42 rental units. Total Development Cost: $5,326,516.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the acquisition and rehabilitation of a scattered site development of two properties. Sun Valley Landings will serve low income households earning at or below 50 percent and 60 percent of the area median income.

###


Источник: https://www.kaine.senate.gov/press-releases/sens-warner-kaine-announce-nearly-7-million-to-support-affordable-housing-development-in-virginia

Federal Home Loan Of Atlanta

Columbus 2021 Travel Tips For College Students

COLUMBUS, Ohio – Even while the Covid-19 situation continues, the most effective group trip operators are well prepared for the reopening of travel in the United States. With analysts forecasting tremendous pent-up visitor demand once limitations are relaxed, destinations that provide amazing experiences at a low cost should be on the radar of every group tour professional. Columbus, without a question, fits the bill. To that aim, Experience Columbus just released its 2021Tour Planner Guide, which was meticulously vetted by the company's highly trained group tour experts. The guide puts everything tour planners need to create outstanding itineraries right at their fingertips. Free to any group. The 2021Tour Planner Guide includes exclusive behind-the-scenes group experiences, unique events, and unforgettable guided tours for tour operators. There are additional sections on transportation, motorcoach parking, maps, and other logistical resources. At ExperienceColumbus.com/tour-planners, tour organizers can request their new Columbus Tour Planner Guide or view the digital version. Specially created itineraries showcasing major sites, culinary experiences, attractions, activities, and hotel options are presented in the guide's main section to help group professionals succeed. These might be used as a source of inspiration or as a proposed route around Columbus. During a visit, don't forget to include. The Columbus Group Tour team, on the other hand, is now available to work with planners to develop personalized tour itineraries tailored to their groups' exact needs, finances, size, and interests. A perforated sheet immediately inside the front cover of the new guide allows readers to jot down plans and favorite Columbus tour ideas. Columbus, which was named one of the Travel Channel's "Top 10 Domestic Places to Visit in 2021," expects a significant surge in visitors once travel begins. There is no better time for groups to visit Ohio's capital, which is one of America's fastest-growing cities. This provides unrivaled value for money Planners and vacationers alike rave about Columbus' hands-on and engaging group activities. New attractions, installations, and exhibitions at Columbus' many arts and culture organizations, as well as almost a dozen new hotel openings, all contribute to the city's growing excitement. Experience Columbus has created a constantly updated schedule showcasing the city's limitless "virtual" experiences via ExperienceColumbus.com/events until the shelter-in-place orders are lifted. Several popular Columbus group trip venues have created internet communication options. resources and encounters Here are a few examples: Franklin Park Conservatory (Franklin Park Conservatory) Museum of Science and Industry (COSI) The Cartoon Library and Museum of Billy Ireland In addition, Scott Wood, a Columbus writer and arts lover, offers virtual tours of favourite Columbus group tour locations like the Columbus Museum of Art and Thurber House on his Scott's Social Distance Tours Facebook page. Columbus is unlike any other city. Ohio's capital is noted for its open attitude, sharp style, and entrepreneurial energy, and it is vibrant and active. Columbus' many districts, vibrant nightlife, notable music scene, arts and culinary experiences, festivals, and attractions The diversity of its friendly people, who eagerly await warmly welcome tourists, adds to the allure of the accommodations. www.ExperienceColumbus.com provides free trip guides, maps, online booking, and thorough information. Thanksgiving is the end-of-semester holiday for many college students this year, rather than the customary winter break in December. Some colleges began semesters early in order to finish before Thanksgiving, while others have students complete the semester virtually. Whatever your circumstances, having a well-thought-out plan for how you will go from point A to point B is beneficial. You'll be able to spend the holidays with your family if you commute from university to home. Here are some suggestions for COVID-friendly Thanksgiving travel. Prepare While at School Try to quarantine as much as possible in the days preceding up to leaving college. This means staying in your dorm, avoiding large gatherings, and going out with a mask on. If your school provides COVID testing, you should take one a few days before you depart. You don't want to take a test on the spur of the moment and then discover you're unwell at the airport! Review Your Travel Options Consider driving alone while making travel plans; disease specialists agree that this is the safest mode of transportation during COVID. Students with automobiles may find that driving and only stopping for gas or to use the restroom at rest stops is the best option. Students who rely on public transportation, such as a bus or plane, should exercise extreme caution during their journeys. Bring a lot of protective gear Students are highly recommended to wear masks, bring hand wipes and hand sanitizer, and make a few pits stops as possible, regardless of method of transportation. If you're driving, carry your own snacks, and avoid drinking or eating if you're flying, taking the bus, or taking the train. Wearing a mask and a Plexiglas face shield combination may appear ridiculous, but extra protection, especially on public transit, could mean the difference between a negative and positive COVID test. Be Flexible to Change Prepare for this Thanksgiving knowing that it will be different from prior ones. When students return home, they may need to quarantine themselves or avoid spending time with elderly relatives or individuals who have pre-existing conditions. Remember that adapting to changes can help make the holiday season safer and healthier. Get matched to scholarships that fit your abilities, strengths, and unique qualities in real-time. Our algorithms link you with scholarships that are a good fit for you. Conduct a free college scholarship search at Listscholarship.com to find a comprehensive list of college scholarships.

Read More
Источник: https://www.listscholarship.com/federal-home-loan-of-atlanta

Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (FHLBank Atlanta) announced today that funding for its 2020 Homeowner Assistance Products is now available. The Homeowner Assistance Products are part of FHLBank Atlanta’s Affordable Housing Program (AHP), and are designed to help eligible borrowers purchase or rehabilitate their home. 

New for 2020, FHLBank Atlanta has streamlined the homebuyer contribution aspect of its product offerings. For certain products, homebuyers were previously required to contribute $1 for every $4 of funding received, and were also required to contribute a minimum of $1,000 total. The $1,000 contribution minimum remains in effect, but beginning this year the 4-to-1 match requirement has been eliminated. This change impacts the First-time Homebuyer product, the Community Partners product, and the Foreclosure Recovery product, and will result in greater benefits for homebuyers that receive AHP funding. 

A summary of 2020 Homeowner Assistance Products is below. To learn more click here

  • First-time Homebuyer Product The First-time Homebuyer Product provides up to $5,000 in down-payment, closing-cost, and principal reduction assistance for eligible first-time homebuyers. 
  • Community Partners Product The Community Partners Product provides up to $7,500 in down-payment, closing-cost, and principal reduction assistance for homebuyers who are currently employed or retired law enforcement officers, educators, firefighters, health care workers, and other first responders. 
  • Foreclosure Recovery Product The Foreclosure Recovery Product provides up to $15,000 in down-payment, closing-cost, and principal reduction assistance for eligible homebuyers purchasing properties from the Real Estate Owned inventory of any FHLBank Atlanta member financial institution. -MORE- 
  • Community Rebuild and Restore Product The Community Rebuild and Restore Product provides up to $10,000 in funding for the rehabilitation of an existing owner-occupied home in a “Major Disaster Declaration” area as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The homeowner must have at least 30 days of current ownership by life estate or full interest in the fee title and have ownership of the subject property at the time of the “Major Disaster Declaration.” 
  • Veterans Purchase Product The Veterans Purchase Product provides up to $7,500 in down-payment, closing-cost, and principal reduction assistance for homebuyers who are veterans or active-duty members of the U.S. military, their spouses, or their surviving spouses. 
  • Returning Veterans Purchase Product The Returning Veterans Purchase Product provides up to $10,000 in down-payment, closing-cost, and principal reduction assistance for homebuyers who are currently serving or have served in an overseas military intervention for any branch of the U.S. military, their spouses, or their surviving spouses. 

Since 1997, Homeowner Assistance Products have provided more than $226.5 million in grant funding that has enabled more than 34,000 households to purchase or rehabilitate a home. In 2019 alone, FHLBank Atlanta member financial institutions delivered $18.1 million in home purchase and rehabilitation grant funding, leveraging more than $581.9 million in first mortgage financing to assist 3,216 households. 

A listing of member financial institutions is available on the FHLBank Atlanta website at www.fhlbatl.com

If you need assistance finding a member financial institution to work with, or for more information, call the Bank’s Community Investment Services department at 1.800.536.9650, option 3, option 0. 

About the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta FHLBank Atlanta offers competitively-priced financing, community development grants, and other banking services to help member financial institutions make affordable home mortgages and provide economic development credit to neighborhoods and communities. The Bank’s members – its shareholders and customers – are commercial banks, credit unions, savings institutions, community development financial institutions, and insurance companies located in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. FHLBank Atlanta is one of 11 district banks in the Federal Home Loan Bank System. Since 1990, the FHLBanks have awarded approximately $6.2 billion in AHP funds, assisting more than 911,000 households. 

Recent Posts

Источник: https://palmettowarriorconnection.org/fhlbank-atlanta-announces-2020-funding-for-homeowners/

Sens. Warner, Kaine Announce Nearly $7 Million To Support Affordable Housing Development In Virginia

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) announced today that 18 initiatives led by local financial institutions and non-profits in Virginia will receive $6.6 million from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (FHL-Bank Atlanta)’s Affordable Housing Program (AHP) to support affordable housing development in Virginia.

“Affordable housing is one of the bedrocks of economic security and financial stability for American families,” said Sen. Warner. “These funds will provide valuable resources for existing housing networks in Virginia, which are already on the ground working to provide individuals with a place to live that is within their reach. This support will help revitalize local neighborhoods, create jobs, and encourage economic development within the Commonwealth.”

FHL-Bank Atlanta is one of the 11 regional banks in the Federal Home Loan Bank System, providing commercial banks, credit unions, savings institutions, community development financial institutions, and insurance companies within seven southeastern states, including Virginia, with a reliable source of funding for affordable home mortgages and community lending. More information on FHL-Bank-Atlanta can be found here.

The 18 awardees and programs descriptions are listed below:

Member: Burke & Herbert Bank & Trust Company. Sponsored by: Community Housing Partners Corporation. Grant: $275,000 for 55 rental units. Total Development Cost: $15,077,337.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the adaptive-reuse of five existing historic buildings within the Spring Hill Senior Community Located in Lorton, VA. Lindsay Hill will serve seniors age 62 and older and individuals with disabilities in Fairfax County.

  • Washburn Place: Marshall, VA

Member: Middleburg Bank. Sponsored by: Windy Hill Foundation. Grant: $500,000 for 30 rental units. Total Development Cost: $8,998,123.

Description: AHP funds will be used in connection with the new construction of a 30-unit federal home loan bank of atlanta grant housing project in Marshall, VA. Rent for the units will be affordable to households at 40, 50, and 60 percent of the area median income.

  • Robinson Park: Harrisonburg, VA

Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Southeastern Housing Preservation, Inc.Grant: $243,909 for 88 rental units. Total Development Cost: $11,624,106.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the new construction of 88 units of affordable rental housing to families earning 50 and 60 percent of the area median income. Upon completion, Robinson Park will be EarthCraft Platinum certified.

  • The Village at Rockbridge: Lexington, VA

Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Mark-Dana Corporation. Secondary Sponsor: Virginia United Methodist Housing Development Corporation. Grant: $325,000 for 64 rental units. Total Development Cost: $4,368,570.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the rehabilitation of a 64 unit affordable apartment property in Lexington, VA. Rehabilitation will include replacement of roofing, water fixtures, cabinets, doors, flooring, windows, appliances, and HVAC units.

  • Cavalier Senior Apartments: Petersburg, VA

Member: Bank of America, National Association. Sponsored by: Humanities Foundation, Inc.Grant: $471,911 for 80 rental units. Total Development Cost: $11,686,838.

Description: AHP funds will go toward a new construction development located in the City of Petersburg, VA. The development will consist of 80 garden style apartments for seniors and will be a mix of one and two-bedroom units targeting residents at 40, 50, and 60 percent of the area median income.

  • Jackson Ward Senior: Richmond, VA

Member: Capital One, National Association. Sponsored by: Community Housing Inc.. Grant: $500,000 for 72 rental units. Total Development Cost: $13,757,488.

Description: The Jackson ward Senior building is part of the multiphase redevelopment of a low income senior public housing site in Richmond, VA. The new building will contain 72 one bedroom units and will be built to Earth Craft Platinum standards.

  • New Clay House II: Richmond, VA

Member: Union Bank & Trust. Sponsored by: Virginia Supportive Housing. Grant: $500,00 for 80 rental units. Total Development Cost: $14,845,886.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the renovation and expansion of an affordable housing development for formerly homeless individuals in Richmond. After the renovation and expansion, at least 55 units will be reserved for formerly homeless individuals and the remaining units will be reserved for individuals earning at or below 50 percent of the area median income.

  • Creekside Manor: Henrico, VA
    Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Mark-Dana Corporation. Secondary Sponsor: Virginia United Methodist Housing Development Corporation. Grant: $500,000 for 97 rental units. Total Development Cost: $7,448,920.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the rehabilitation of a 97-unit affordable apartment property in Henrico, VA. Rehabilitation will include replacement of roofing, water fixtures, cabinets, doors, flooring, windows, appliances, and HVAC units.

  • Village Green: Gloucester, VA

Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Southeastern Housing Preservation, Inc.Grant: $168,736 for 32 rental units. Total Development Cost: $3,227,197.

Description: Village Green consists of the acquisition and rehabilitation of 32 existing multi-family units. Rehabilitation will include new windows, HVAC, water heaters, appliances, roofs, siding, flooring, and improvements to accessibility. Upon completion, the property will be EarthCraft certified.

  • Cypress Landing: Chesapeake, VA

Member: TowneBank. Sponsored by: Second Act Communities. Grant: $500,000 for 50 rental units. Total Development Cost: $10,448,624.

Description: AHP funds will go toward the construction of an apartment development containing 44 one-bedroom units and six two-bedroom units. The development will serve very low-income disabled and/or homeless veterans. Thirty-eight units will serve veterans who have incomes at or below 30 percent of the area median income and the remaining 12 units will serve veterans who have incomes at or below 50 percent of the area median income.

Member: The Old Point National Bank of Phoebus. Sponsored by: Hampton Redevelopment and Housing Authority. Grant: $500,000 for 48 rental units. Total Development Cost: $9,466,152.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the construction of a 48-unit affordable senior independent housing development consisting of garden style apartments. The development will include housing for elderly veterans.

  • Ada Park: Newport News, VA

Member: Branch Banking and Trust Company. Sponsored by: Southeastern Housing Preservation, Inc.Grant: $202,295 for 42 rental units. Total Development Cost: $7,998,558.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the construction of an affordable housing development which will provide 42 units of rental housing to families earning below 65 percent of the area median income.

  • Belleville Meadows: Suffolk, VA

Member: Capital One, National Association. Sponsored by: Community Housing Partners Corporation. Grant: $300,000 for 128 rental units. Total Development Cost: $14,322,493.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the rehabilitation of an existing affordable housing development in Suffolk, VA. Rehabilitation will include new flooring, roofing, energy efficient windows, kitchen appliances, faucets, and showerheads.

  • Dale Homes Phase I: Portsmouth, VA

Member: TowneBank. Sponsored by: Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority. Grant: $500,000 for 146 rental units. Total Development Cost: $22,907,475.

Description: AHP funds will be used in connection with the acquisition and rehabilitation of an existing 146 unit public housing development known as Dale Homes Phase I and will be targeted to very low income families in Portsmouth, VA. The project involves the conversion of public housing units under the Rental Assistance Demonstration program.

  • Dale Homes Phase II: Portsmouth, VA

Member: TowneBank. Sponsored by: Portsmouth Redevelopment and Housing Authority. Grant: $500,000 for 150 rental units. Total Development Cost: $23,494,499.

Description: AHP funds will be used in connection with the acquisition and rehabilitation of an existing 150-unit public housing development known as Dale Homes Phase II, and will be targeted to very low income families in Portsmouth, VA. The project involves the conversion of public housing units under the Rental Assistance Demonstration program.

  • Homeownership and Federal home loan bank of atlanta grant Virginia: various sites, VA

Member: Union Bank & Trust. Sponsored by: Greater Lynchburg Habitat for Humanity (*). Secondary Sponsors: Habitat for Humanity in the Roanoke Valley and Farmville Area Habitat for Humanity, Inc. Grant: $199,500 for 20 ownership units. Total Development Cost: $3,380,305

Description: AHP funds will be used for the construction and rehabilitation of single family homes across Virginia. Eleven of the units will be new construction and nine will be rehabilitation of existing and vacant houses.

  • Greater Charlottesville Habitat for Humanity: Charlottesville, VA

Member: Union Bank & Trust. Sponsored by: Greater Charlottesville Habitat for Humanity. Grant: $186,200 for 19 ownership units. Total Development Cost: $3,003,788.

Description: AHP funds will go for the construction of single family homes in Charlottesville, Virginia. Habitat for Humanity reserves at least 25 percent of its homeownership opportunities for residents of public housing or who have with Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority Housing Choice vouchers. All of the proposed new homes are accessible with at least one no-step entryway and are built to ENERGY STAR® 3 specifications.

Member: Union Bank & Trust. Sponsored by: Community Housing Partners Corporation. Grant: $246,333 for 42 rental units. Total Development Cost: $5,326,516.

Description: AHP funds will be used for the acquisition and rehabilitation of a scattered site development of two properties. Sun Valley Landings will serve low income households earning at or below 50 percent and 60 percent of the area median income.

###


Источник: https://www.kaine.senate.gov/press-releases/sens-warner-kaine-announce-nearly-7-million-to-support-affordable-housing-development-in-virginia

Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta awards $20 million for affordable housing development nationwide

by

New white apartment houses in Berlin, Germany

With the lack of housing inventory leading to rising home prices throughout the country, affordable housing is a concern for many. In order to help alleviate that, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta announced that it will assist in funding 54 affordable housing projects across the country.

The bank awarded more than $20 million as part of its 2017 Affordable Housing Program to assist in the acquisition, new construction, rehabilitation or preservation of affordable rental and homeownership units in a number of states.

The program awards funds annually through a competitive application process to help provide housing opportunities for moderate, low- and very low-income households.

“The Affordable Housing Program helps pave the way for our members to work with developers and community groups to foster greater housing opportunities and economic development in the communities they serve,” said FHL Bank Atlanta Executive Vice President and Chief Business Officer Robert Dozier. “We are proud of the impact these funds have in helping low- and moderate-income families find affordable housing, and in building stronger local economies.”

There are five projects awarded more than $2 million in grant equity to fund 256 rental units and eight ownership units, four of which are for projects in or around Atlanta. One that is in the city is the Holly Street Apartments, which received $500,000 for 40 new rental units for older residents, federal home loan bank of atlanta grant targeting veterans.

The other development is Phoenix House, which received $500,000 for the renovation and redevelopment in 69 rental units for formerly homeless individuals with disabilities. Phoenix House is currently located in the Atlanta Beltline, where officials are currently working to maintain affordable housing.

StateRental Units FundedOwner Units FundedAHP FundsTotal Development
Alabama160$1,185,000$21,888,219
District of Columbia64$331,857$44,610,032
Florida23740$1,912,251$21,599,506
Georgia2568$2,080,000$45,346,737
Maryland53$500,000$10,595,088
North Carolina703$3,784,595$46,833,554
South Carolina19310$650,000$28,101,856
Virginia46427$4,264,149$99,013,557
Out of District*8894$5,653,166$148,999,901
*Out of District states that received funding are Arkansas, Connecticut, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Wisconsin

Read More Related to This Post

Источник: https://atlantaagentmagazine.com/2017/06/20/federal-home-loan-bank-of-atlanta-awards-20-million-for-affordable-housing-development-nationwide/

998 F.2d 214

8 IER Cases 1191

Harrell G. ANDREWS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF ATLANTA, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-2464.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Argued May 4, 1993.
Decided June 28, 1993.

Robert Mauldin Elliot, J. Griffin Morgan, Eliot, Pishko, Gelbin & Morgan, P.A., Winston-Salem, NC, argued, for plaintiff-appellant.

John Francis Wymer, III, Powell, Goldstein, Frazier & Murphy, Atlanta, GA, argued (Martin N. Erwin, Smith, Helms, Mulliss & Moore, Greensboro, NC, on brief), for defendant-appellee.

Before WILKINSON and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and MICHAEL, United States District Judge for the Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation.

OPINION

WILKINSON, Circuit Judge:


Advertisement

view counter
1

This case presents the question of whether a regional Federal Home Loan Bank was a government actor when it discharged one of its employees. We hold that it was not, and accordingly, we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment to defendant.

I.

2

The Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (the Bank) is one of twelve regional banks set up by Congress under the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to provide banking services to member institution savings-and-loans. 12 U.S.C. §§ 1421-49. Services include lending to member thrifts, serving as a depository, processing of checks, and providing economic analysis. The Bank operates as a central credit facility for its members, enhancing the liquidity of the thrift industry by allowing members to secure advances against their assets, which are primarily home mortgages. See Fidelity Financial Corp. v. Federal Home Loan Bank, 792 F.2d 1432, 1434 (9th Cir.1986). The Bank receives no federal funding. 12 U.S.C. § 1438. It is a corporation whose shares are wholly owned by its member institutions and whose profits are distributed as dividends on a quarterly basis to those shareholders. 12 U.S.C. § 1426(g). Member institutions vote for eight of the fourteen directors of the Bank, 12 U.S.C. § 1427(a), and the directors are responsible for directing the Bank's affairs, including the election of the Bank president. 12 U.S.C. § 1427(j).

3

At the time of the events giving rise to this lawsuit, the Bank was supervised and regulated by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (the Board), an independent agency of the federal government. 12 U.S.C. § 1437, repealed by Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, Title VII, § 703(a), Pub.L. No. 101-73, 103 Stat. 183, 415. The Board appointed six of the Bank's directors and designated the Bank's chairman and vice-chairman. 12 U.S.C. § 1427(a), (g), repealed by Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, Title VII, § 702(a), Pub.L. No. 101-73, 103 Stat. at 413. In addition, the Board (through its authority over the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation) had the authority to examine savings-and-loans, which it had delegated to employees of the regional Home Loan Kohls com pay my bill. See generally Dirk S. Adams & Rodney R. Peck, The Federal Home Loan Banks and the Home Finance System, 43 Bus.Law. 833 (1988).

4

In June 1987, Harrell G. Andrews was fired by the Bank from his position as a field examiner in its Charlotte office. The parties offer very different explanations for the discharge. Andrews claims that he was discharged for criticizing a change in the Bank's asset-classification policy. The Bank claims that it terminated Andrews for behavior that compromised an examination and for his failure to cooperate with Bank personnel who were charged with inquiring into that behavior. At Andrews' request, an Ombudsmen Committee appointed by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board reviewed Andrews' termination. The Committee upheld the action of the Bank.

5

After his termination, Andrews filed this lawsuit, alleging violations of the First and Fifth Amendments, along with a variety of state law claims. After removing the case to federal court, the Bank filed a motion for summary judgment, which the district court granted. The court rejected American eagle credit union routing number st louis constitutional claims because the Bank that terminated him was not a government actor. It rejected Andrews' state law claims because they were preempted by federal statute. Andrews now appeals.

II.

6

In order to establish a federal home loan bank of atlanta grant of the First Amendment, Andrews must first show that the federal government was responsible for the termination of his employment. Hudgens v. NLRB, 424 U.S. 507, 513, 96 S.Ct. 1029, 1033, 47 L.Ed.2d 196 (1976) ("It is, of course, a commonplace that the constitutional guarantee of free speech is a guarantee only against abridgment by government, federal or state."). In our constitutional scheme, state action doctrine protects the private sector from the restrictions imposed on the conduct of government. The line drawn by state action thus "permit[s] citizens to structure their private relations as they choose subject only to the constraints of statutory or decisional law." Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., Inc., --- U.S. ---- ---- 111 S.Ct. 2077, 2082, 114 L.Ed.2d 660 (1991).

7

Many of the indicia of the Bank's operations are characteristic of a private institution: the Bank is privately funded, privately owned, and it pays out its profits to its shareholders in the form of quarterly dividends. The Bank provides private banking services, such as lending money, issuing letters of credit, and serving as a trustee. The Bank's employees are not in the civil service and are not employees of the federal government. There is thus ample reason to conclude that, despite its federal charter, the Bank operates more like a private entity than as a part of the federal government. See San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. United States Olympic Committee, 483 U.S. 522, 543, 107 S.Ct. 2971, 2985, 97 L.Ed.2d 427 (1987) (holding USOC to be a private entity despite its federal charter). It is clear that Congress intended that the Home Loan Bank system be owned and operated in the main by member institutions rather than the federal government. See Hannah v. Federal Land Bank, 903 F.2d 1159, 1162 (7th Cir.1990) ("both Federal Land Bank Associations and Production Credit Associations are farmer-owned and operated agencies rather than federal instrumentalities.").

III.


Advertisement

view counter
8

Andrews nonetheless claims that the Bank's termination of him qualifies as state action, because the Bank was an agent or instrumentality of the federal government. Alternatively, Andrews claims that the Board was a joint participant in the decision to terminate him.

9

We recognize that the many private characteristics of the Bank's operations cannot end the inquiry. In certain circumstances, a private actor can still be bound by constitutional limitations because its "conduct is fairly attributable to the state." Arlosoroff v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, 746 F.2d 1019, 1021 (4th Cir.1984) (footnote omitted). In order to show state action by a private entity, however, it must be demonstrated that "the private party charged with the deprivation could be described in all fairness as a state actor." Edmonson, --- U.S. at ---- 111 S.Ct. at 2083 (citations omitted). A private party can be deemed a state actor in four contexts: (1) when the state has coerced the private actor to commit an act that would be unconstitutional if done by the state; (2) when the state has sought to evade a clear constitutional duty through delegation to a private actor; (3) when the state has delegated a traditionally and exclusively public function to a private actor; or (4) when the state has committed an unconstitutional act in the course of enforcing a right of a private citizen. If the conduct does not fall into one of these four categories, then the private conduct is not an action of the state. Applying these categories to the instant case, we find no state action in Andrews' termination.

A.

10

The first category, coercion by the state, stands for the obvious proposition that when the government orders specific conduct, it must be held accountable for that conduct. The presumption in favor of respecting the private choice of individuals is dissolved by the force of state command. "When the State has commanded a particular result, it has saved to itself the power to determine that result and . has removed that decision from the sphere of private choice." Peterson v. City of Greenville, 373 U.S. 244, 248, 83 S.Ct. 1119, 1121, 10 L.Ed.2d 323 (1963) (state action when restaurant excluded black patrons in conformity with local ordinance); see also Adickes v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 170, 90 S.Ct. 1598, 1615, 26 L.Ed.2d 142 (1970) ("a State is responsible for the discriminatory act of a private party when the State, by its law, has compelled the act."). The application of the category of coercion may be less obvious in other cases. In Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Ass'n, 489 U.S. 602, 109 S.Ct. 1402, 103 L.Ed.2d 639 (1989), the Court found state action for Fourth Amendment purposes when federal regulations authorized railroads to test for the presence of drug or alcohol in employees who violated certain safety rules. Although the regulation was permissive on its face, the Court nonetheless concluded that state action was involved because the regulations superseded collective bargaining agreements and prohibited the railroad from divesting itself by contract of the authority to test employees. Id. at 615, 109 S.Ct. at 1412. In addition, the regulation made compliance by employees mandatory. Id. Thus, the regulation narrowed the range of private choices available under contract law to the railroad and its employees; accordingly, constitutional limitations came into play to restrain the government's power.

11

The Board's regulation of the Bank does not fall within this first category of governmental coercion. The Board can hardly be said to have coerced the Bank into terminating Andrews. The Bank made that decision on its own, and the Board became involved only when Andrews sought review from the Board's Ombudsmen Committee, long after the Bank had terminated Andrews. The Bank was established by federal statute, but that statute does not establish personnel policies for the Bank. Nor does the mere fact that the Federal Home Loan Act permitted the Bank to terminate Andrews "at pleasure" transform that termination into an act of the federal government. See Flagg Bros. Inc. v. Brooks, 436 U.S. 149, 160 n. 10, 98 S.Ct. 1729, 1735 n. 10, 56 L.Ed.2d 185 (1978) ("It would intolerably broaden . the notion of state action . to hold that the mere existence of a body of property law in a State, whether decisional or statutory, itself amounted to 'state action' even though no state process or state officials were ever involved in enforcing that body of law."). The Bank is extensively regulated by the Board, but regulation of an entity, standing alone, will not make a private entity an agent of the state. Moose Lodge No. 107 v. Irvis, 407 U.S. 163, 176-77, 92 S.Ct. 1965, 1973, 32 L.Ed.2d 627 (1972). The government must have compelled the act of which Andrews complains. "If the state in its regulatory or subsidizing function does not order or cause the action complained of . there is no state action." Arlosoroff, 746 F.2d at 1022.

B.

12

The second category of state action involves cases in which the government has delegated responsibility to a private party for conduct that would be unconstitutional if done by the government. Government cannot evade constitutional duties by delegating the responsibility to a private contractor. In West v. Atkins, the state contracted with a private physician to provide medical care for its prisoners, a duty imposed on the state by the Eighth Amendment. 487 U.S. 42, 43-46, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 2252-53, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988). The physician was found to be a state actor in his care of the prisoners. Id. at 56, 108 S.Ct. at 2259 ("Contracting out prison medical care does not relieve the State of its constitutional duty to provide adequate medical treatment to those in its custody, and it does not deprive the State's prisoners of the means to vindicate their Eighth Amendment rights."). In contrast, when the state has not delegated a constitutional duty, there is no state action if the services are provided by a private contractor. See Rendell-Baker v. Kohn, 457 U.S. 830, 841-43, 102 S.Ct. 2764, 2771-72, 73 L.Ed.2d 418 (1982) (private school providing educational services to state not limited by First Amendment or Due Process in terminating teachers and counselor); Blum v. Yaretsky, 457 U.S. 991, 1011, 102 S.Ct. 2777, 2789, 73 L.Ed.2d 534 (1982) (private nursing home providing services to Medicaid not limited by Due Process in discharges and transfers of patients). This second category protects the presumption of individual choice for private parties, even when they act on behalf of the government, while not permitting the government to take advantage of that presumption by evading its own duties under the Constitution.

13

The Board's acts do not fit the second category for state action. While the Constitution plainly permits the federal government to supervise savings-and-loans, it places no duty on the government to do so. What may be wise as a matter of public policy is not compelled as a matter of constitutional decree. Hence the government evaded no constitutional duty by delegating the examination of thrifts to regional Bank employees. West, 487 U.S. at 56, 108 S.Ct. at 2259.

C.

14

The third category is commonly denominated the "public function" theory of state action. It encompasses the "exercise by a private entity of powers traditionally exclusively reserved to the State." Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co., 419 U.S. 345, 352, 95 S.Ct. 449, 454, 42 L.Ed.2d 477 (1974). State action via the private exercise of public functions, however, has been found only in narrow circumstances. See id. (citing Nixon v. Condon, 286 U.S. 73, 52 S.Ct. 484, 76 L.Ed. 984 (1932) (election); Terry v. Adams, 345 U.S. 461, 73 S.Ct. 809, 97 L.Ed. 1152 (1953) (election); Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501, 66 S.Ct. 276, 90 L.Ed. 265 (1946) (company town); Evans v. Newton, 382 U.S. 296, 86 S.Ct. 486, 15 L.Ed.2d 373 (1966) (municipal park)). See also Edmonson, --- U.S. at ---- 111 S.Ct. at 2086 (finding state action in the use of peremptory strikes because "a private entity becomes a government actor for the limited purpose best home remedy for canker sore in mouth using peremptories during jury selection. The selection of jurors represents a unique governmental function delegated to private litigants by the government ."; emphasis added). This third category of state action serves a purpose similar to the second, in that it prevents a state from evading the Constitution by delegation. Its reach has been "carefully confined," however, Flagg Bros., 436 U.S. at 163, 98 S.Ct. at 1737, so as not to interfere with the state's ability to contract for services not "traditionally exclusively reserved to the state."

15

The functions performed by the Bank and its employees--banking and bank examination--are not traditionally and exclusively public functions. See Morast v. Lance, 807 F.2d 926, 931 (11th Cir.1987).1 The mere federal home loan bank of atlanta grant that the Bank's "regulatory function may be of some public service lends no support to the finding of state action, for the function is not one traditionally reserved to the state." Arlosoroff, 746 F.2d at 1021. Cf. Morin v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 810 F.2d 720, 723 (7th Cir.1987) (per curiam) (Conrail held not to be a federal agency). Prior to 1932, when the Federal Home Loan Bank System was established, the federal government had no involvement in regulating the thrift industry. Paul T. Clark et al., Regulation of Savings Associations Under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, 45 Bus.Law. 1013, 1017 (1990). Even today, self-regulatory mechanisms of important industries exist alongside governmental ones. See 15 U.S.C. § 78o -3 (authorizing self-regulation of securities broker-dealers subject to Securities and Exchange Commission supervision). Important social ends are commonly accomplished through a happy mix of public and private means. For example, the function at issue in this case--the independent auditing of business and financial institutions--is often undertaken by both public and private examiners. The fact that the examiners here have been both civil service employees and employees of the Bank who lack civil service protection demonstrates the inadvisability of denominating this function an exclusively public one. See Edwin J. Gray, The Role of Regulation in the Thrift Industry, 1987 Ann.Rev.Banking L. 235, 243.2 The Bank, therefore, does not perform a function that has been traditionally and exclusively reserved to the sovereign, and we cannot regard its conduct as state action.

D.

16

The fourth category of state action limits the actions that a state can take in enforcing the rights of private individuals. When the state commits an unconstitutional act in the course of enforcing private rights, the private entity may be held accountable for invoking the state's authority. For example, when the state enforces a property right at the behest of a private entity, the state's actions may be limited by Due Process. See Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co., 457 U.S. 922, 924, 102 S.Ct. 2744, 2747, 73 L.Ed.2d 482 (1982) (state action found when "Clerk of the state court issued a writ of attachment, which was then executed by the County Sheriff" on basis of ex parte petition from creditor). By contrast, when a private party acts alone without the assistance of state agents to enforce property rights created by state law, no state action is involved. See Flagg Bros., 436 U.S. 149, 166, 98 S.Ct. 1729, 1738 (no state action where warehousemen sold goods, executing lien permitted by state law). There must be state action, not "mere acquiescence." Id. at 164, 98 S.Ct. at 1737; San Francisco Arts & Athletics, 483 U.S. at 547, 107 S.Ct. at 2985. This, too, is consistent with state action doctrine's protection of the private sphere: parties can contract around the permissive remedies provided by state law. When the private individual invokes the aid of the state, however, the state must act within the confines of the Constitution.

17

Under the fourth category, the Board committed no unconstitutional act in the course of enforcing the Bank's right to terminate Andrews. The Bank acted in furtherance of its statutory right to dismiss Andrews at will, 12 U.S.C. § 1432(a), and it had no need to enlist the Board to enforce that right. The Ombudsmen Committee reviewed the Bank's action at Andrews' request, not at the request of the Bank or at the direction of the Board. The Bank acting alone, not the Board, fired Andrews--the availability of post hoc review did not change this fact. Cf. Flagg Bros., 436 U.S. at 161-62 n. 11, 98 S.Ct. at 1736 n. 11 (availability of judicial review after sale under warehouseman's lien did not implicate state in original sale). The Board's decision not to interfere with the Bank's termination of Andrews thus did not make that act one of the federal government. See id. at 164, 98 S.Ct. at 1737; cf. Milburn v. Anne Arundel County Dep't of Social Serv., 871 F.2d 474, 477-79 (4th Cir.1989) (child abuse by foster parents not state action when state failed to intervene to protect child). We conclude, therefore, that Andrews' termination was the act of the Bank, and it cannot be fairly attributed to the Board or to the federal government.

IV.

18

"The directors of each Federal Home Loan Bank . shall have power . to select, employ, and fix the compensation of such officers, employees, attorneys, and agents . and to dismiss at pleasure such officers, employees, attorneys, and agents." 12 U.S.C. § 1432(a) (emphasis added). Andrews claims that the district court erred in holding his state law wrongful termination claim preempted by this federal statute. Andrews argues that his state claim supports the purpose of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to regulate the soundness of thrifts by providing protection to employees who are terminated for refusing to violate the Act or its regulations.

19

The Supreme Court has identified three situations in which federal law preempts state law: (1) when explicit statutory language preempts state law; (2) when states regulate a field that Congress intended to be completely occupied by the federal government; or (3) when state law actually conflicts with federal law. English v. General Electric Co. 496 U.S. 72, 78-79, 110 S.Ct. 2270, 2275, 110 L.Ed.2d 65 (1990). English involved a state remedy which was supplementary to the remedy provided by Congress. See id. at 89, 110 S.Ct. at 2280-81. In this case, however, Congress intended for federal law to define the discretion which the Bank may exercise in the discharge of employees. Any state claim for wrongful termination would plainly conflict with the discretion accorded the Bank by Congress. Accord Inglis v. Feinerman, 701 F.2d 97, 99 (9th Cir.1983) ("We hold that § 1432(a) permits no inroads into the 'dismiss at pleasure' language."). See also Ana Leon T. v. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, 823 F.2d 928, 931 (6th Cir.1987) ("at pleasure" language of the Federal Reserve Act, 12 U.S.C. § 341, Fifth, "preempts any state-created employment right to the contrary."). The district court therefore did not err in holding Andrews' state law claim preempted.

V.

20

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is

Источник: https://openjurist.org/998/f2d/214/andrews-v-federal-home-loan-bank-of-atlanta

2017 AWARD HIGHLIGHTS


FHLB ATLANTA


FHLB ATLANTA ANNOUNCES 2017 AFFORDABLE HOUSING GRANT AWARDS

FIVE PROJECTS SUBMITTED WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT
ARE ELIGIBLE FOR $2.25 MILLION IN GRANTS

June 2017

Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta announced that it has awarded over $20 million to assist in the funding of 54 affordable housing projects in 16 states as part of its 2016 Affordable Housing Program (AHP).

Five of those AHP grants, totaling $2,250,000, were awarded to clients of Judd K. Roth Real Estate Development (JKRRED). "This year's grant recipients are all deserving projects," said Td bank business direct customer service Roth. "The AHP grants will go a long way in rehabilitating, preserving and creating much needed affordable housing," Roth added.

This year's awardees include projects in North Carolina, Virginia, Florida and Tennessee. Two USDA RD acquisition/rehab projects are included amongst this year's recipients, as well as the rehabilitation of an 80 unit project targeted to very low and low income farmworker families in Hillsborough County, Florida.

See more at:http://corp.fhlbatl.com/who-we-are/news/federal-home-loan-bank-of-atlanta-awards-20-million-for-affordable-housing-development/

FHLB SAN FRANCISCO


FHLB SAN FRANCISCO ANNOUNCES 2017 AFFORDABLE HOUSING GRANT AWARDS

JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENTS ELIGIBLE St maria goretti san jose $1 MILLION IN GRANTS

June 2017

The Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco (FHLBank San Francisco) awarded $73 million in Affordable Housing Program (AHP) grants for 89 affordable housing projects.

Judd K Roth Real Estate Development was pleased to assist with a very worthwhile project, West Lake Apartments, in Lakeland, Florida. West Lake Apartments creates 100 units of affordable rental housing for extremely low- and very low-income seniors in the City of Lakeland. Located on a Brownfield site. The project will help stabilize the neighborhood by replacing blighted public housing.

The 2017 FHLB San Francisco AHP awarded projects can be viewed at:
http://www.fhlbsf.com/about/news/releases/ahp-awards-2017.aspx

HUD TITLE VI


HUD AWARDS $600,000 TITLE VI FUNDS TO JKRRED CLIENT,
THE LUMBEE TRIBE OF NORTH CAROLINA

July 2017

HUD granted a Title VI loan in the amount of $6,000,000 to the Lumbee Tribe of NC. The purpose of the loan will be to fund the development of three vacant development lots owned by the tribe and the construction of 50 new single family rental dwelling units. The project will be known as Dreamcatcher Phase I. The target population low and moderate income family households with income at or below 60% AMI.

"The Lumbee Tribe is very near and dear to our hearts" Judd Roth remarked. "Our involvement as consultants is a great source of pride and we are truly honored to assist the tribe in providing much needed housing to its members," Roth added.

COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (CED)


JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENT AWARDED
$780,800 IN 2017 COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANTS

THIRD CONSECUTIVE YEAR FOR COALFIED TO RECEIVE CED GRANT

October 2017

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office of Community Services announced the 2017 Community Economic Development (CED) Grant Awards, including a repeat award for Judd K Roth client, The Coalfield Development Corporation (CDC).

The Coalfield Development Corporation will use $780,800 in CED funding to launch Regear Appalachia, which will focus on freight transportation, logistical support, hauling of recyclables and disposables, vehicle maintenance and repair, and automobile refurbishment and resale. Regear Appalachia will hire low-income people living in distressed counties and will create 40 new, full-time jobs.

Judd Roth led the team that submitted the grant and is elated to have received these federal home loan bank of atlanta grant funds for the third year in a row. "Each year we have been honored to be a part of the Coalfield Development Corporation expansion and so pleased to help them continue to realize their mission for the third year in a row," Judd Roth commented.

To see the list of winning grants go to:
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ocs/resource/ced-grant-awards-fy-2017




2016 AWARD HIGHLIGHTS


FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION ELDERLY HOUSING COMMUNITY LOAN PROGRAM (EHCL)


TWO JKRRED CLIENTS AWARDED ELDERLY HOUSING COMMUNITY LOAN FUNDS
THROUGH FHFC

December 2016

Judd K. Roth Real Estate Development consulted on two projects that were awarded EHCL funds in Florida. The Elderly Housing Community Loan (EHCL) program provides loans of up to $750,000 to developers that are making substantial improvements to elderly housing. These funds are available for the purpose of making building preservation, sanitation repairs or improvements required by federal, state or local regulation codes, or life safety or security related improvements.

Two projects were submitted by JKRRED. Both received the maximum award of $750,000: Campus Towers Apartments in Jacksonville, Florida on behalf of Edward Waters College Senior Citizens Home, Inc.; and Palm City Gardens, in Fort Myers, Florida on behalf of the Dunbar Improvement Association.

Palm City Garden Apartments is an existing 100 unit elderly property built in 1986 under the HUD Section federal home loan bank of atlanta grant Program (with a 100% occupied Section 8 contract) that is owned by the Dunbar Improvement Association, Inc., a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation.

Read all about the ECHL Program at the FHFC website:
https://www.floridahousing.org/programs/developers-multifamily-programs/elderly-housing-community-loan

FHLB ATLANTA


August 2016

FHLB ATLANTA ANNOUNCES 2016 AFFORDABLE HOUSING GRANT AWARDS
SEVEN JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENTS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR $3.5 MILLION IN GRANTS

Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta announced that it has awarded $21,988,927 to assist in the funding of 55 affordable housing projects in 16 states as part of its 2016 Affordable Housing Program (AHP).

Seven of those AHP grants, totaling $3,500,000, were awarded to clients of Judd K. Roth Real Estate Development (JKRRED). "This year we are very proud of the assistance we gave to our clients to obtain grants totaling $3.5 million." said Judd Roth.

This year's winners include several projects for families and seniors in North Carolina and Virginia, along with a 126-unit special needs project in Florida for individuals with physical and visual disabilities. Also included in this year's awardees are two projects involving the conversion of public housing units under the Rental Assistance Demonstration program.

See more at:http://corp.fhlbatl.com/who-we-are/news/federal-home-loan-bank-of-atlanta-awards-22-million-for-affordable-housing-development/

COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (CED)


July 2016

JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENT AWARDED $800,000 IN 2016 COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANTS

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office of Community Services announced the 2016 Community Economic Development (CED) Grant Awards, including a repeat award for Judd K Roth client, The Coalfield Development Corporation (CDC).

The Coalfield Development Corporation will use $800,000 in CED funding to launch Refresh Appalachia Business Expansion, which will focus on creating a food hub that aggregates and processes food sources from farmers participating in an existing regional network, earning revenues through wholesale, retail and direct-to-consumer channels. Refresh Appalachia will hire low-income people living in distressed counties and will create 40 new, full-time jobs.

Judd Roth led the team that submitted the grant and is elated to have received these much-needed funds for the second year in a row. "We are delighted that we were able to play a role in helping the Coalfield Development Corporation expand their mission," Judd Roth commented.

FHLB SAN FRANCISCO


June 2016

FHLB SAN FRANCISCO ANNOUNCES 2016 AFFORDABLE HOUSING GRANT AWARDS
JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENTS ELIGIBLE FOR $1.4 MILLION IN GRANTS

The Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco (FHLBank San Francisco) awarded $76 million in Affordable Housing Program (AHP) grants for 85 affordable housing projects in 11 states.

Judd K Roth Real Estate Developments was pleased to assist with two very important projects, both involving the rehabilitation and acquisition of affordable rental units targeted to low and very low income elderly: Trinity Towers South Apartments in Melbourne, FL sponsored by Preservation of Affordable Housing, Inc., received a $1,393,534 AHP grant for the rehabilitation and acquisition of 162 units; and Mohr Plaza MFP 2016 in Lumberton, North Carolina, sponsored by Housing Authority of the City of Lumberton, received a $1,000,000 AHP grant for the rehabilitation and acquisition of 100 units.

The 2016 FHLB San Francisco AHP awarded projects can be viewed at:
http://www.fhlbsf.com/community/grant/2016-ahp-recipients.aspx




2015 AWARD HIGHLIGHTS


FHLB ATLANTA


November 2015

FHLB ATLANTA ANNOUNCES 2015 AFFORDABLE HOUSING GRANT AWARDS
TEN JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENTS ELIGIBLE FOR $4.1 MILLION IN GRANTS

Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (the Bank) announced that it has awarded $19.7 million to assist in the funding of 53 affordable housing projects in 11 states as part of its 2015 Affordable Housing Program (AHP). The projects represent $477,360,366 in total housing development. Federal home loan bank of atlanta grant every $1 dollar in AHP funding, another $23 dollars of financing was leveraged under the FHLBank Atlanta 2015 AHP.

Ten of those grants totaling $4,097,000 were awarded to clients of Judd Tarrant county district court online records. Roth Real Estate Development (JKRRED).

"These awards, totaling nearly $4.1 million, will help to secure much-needed housing for veterans, elderly and very low and low income families that will provide long-term affordability and supportive services," said Judd Roth.

See more at:http://corp.fhlbatl.com/who-we-are/news/federal-home-loan-bank-of-atlanta-awards-197-million-for-affordable-housing-development/#sthash.KwSFkEtC.dpuf

FHLB CINCINNATI


November 2015

FHLB CINCINNATI ANNOUNCES 2015 AFFORDABLE HOUSING GRANT AWARDS
JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENTS ELIGIBLE FOR $1.9 MILLION IN GRANTS

The 2015 Affordable Housing Program (AHP) awards were approved by the FHLB Cincinnati's Board of Directors on November 19, 2015. Two clients of Judd K. Roth Real Estate Development were amongst the awardees.

Palm City Gardens Rehab, a 100-unit rental project in Fort Myers, FL received $975,000. The non-profit sponsor is Dunbar Improvement Association Inc. and the member bank is JPMorgan Chase Bank.

Historic Ashe Hospital, a 46-unit rental project in Jefferson, NC received $880,170. The non-profit sponsor is Northwestern Housing Enterprises Inc. and the member bank is Bank of Tennessee.

The 2015 FHLB Cincinnati AHP awarded projects can be viewed at:
https://www.fhlbcin.com/community-investment/recent-funding-awards/2015-affordable-housing-program-awards/#/other

COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (CED)


September, 2015

JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENTS AWARDED
$1.6 MILLION IN 2015 COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANTS

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office of Community Services announced the 2015 Community Economic Development (CED) Grant Awards.

The Coalfield Development Corporation (CDC) will use $800,000 in CED funding to launch Reclaim Appalachia, which will focus on deconstructing older buildings with no further economic life. Reclaim Appalachia will hire low-income people living in three distressed counties (Wayne, Mingo and Lincoln, WV) to deconstruct area buildings and reuse some of the resulting materials into furniture and home decor accessories and selling the rest as architectural salvage or donating it to Habitat for Humanity. The project will create 40 new, full-time jobs.

Northwestern Housing Enterprises Incorporated (NHE) will use $800,000 in CED funds to capitalize a loan to Mount Jefferson Child Development Center, Inc. (MJCDC, Inc.). MJCDC, Inc. is the largest provider of child development services in Ashe County. The loan will be used toward the development of a new 12,400 square foot child development center to replace the aging current facility. In addition to lending funds, NHE will act as the project developer on behalf of MJCDC, Inc. The new development will allow MJCDC, Inc. to significantly increase its services. In particular, MJCDC, Inc. will expand childcare services to meet the needs of second and third shift employees in the market. Currently, there are no licensed childcare centers providing second and third shift child care services. This project will create 34 new, full-time jobs.

The grant-writing team, led by Judd Roth, is thrilled to have received these much needed funds. "We are overjoyed to have participated so successfully on behalf of our clients and their innovative projects," Judd Roth commented.



2014 AWARD HIGHLIGHTS


FHLB SEATTLE


December 2014

JUDD K. ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENT RECEIVES $700,000 GRANT FOR VETERANS HOUSING

The Federal Home Loan Bank of Seattle announced the award of $4.8 million of Affordable Housing Program (AHP) subsidy for the 2014 funding round. The 2014 AHP awards will support 13 projects providing 465 units of affordable housing for very low- low- and moderate-income households in Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington.

Judd K. Roth Real Estate Development consulted on Freedoms Path at Vancouver, Washington, which will provide housing for homeless veterans and families with disabilities. "We are thrilled to have assisted with obtaining funds for this well-deserved project," said Judd Roth.

HUD RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE INITIATIVE (RAD)


September 2014

JUDD K. ROTH CLIENT, LEXINGTON HOUSING AUTHORITY PARTICIPATES IN
HUD RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE INITIATIVE (RAD)

Judd K. Roth Real Estate Development consulted to Lexington Housing Authority (LHA) and the developer on a HUD RAD (Rental Assistance Demonstration) initiative. The Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) allows public housing agencies (PHAs) and owners of HUD-assisted properties to convert units to project-based Section 8 programs, providing an opportunity to invest funds into properties at risk of being lost from the nation's affordable housing inventory. The Lexington Housing Authority (LHA) is converting all 268 of its public housing units to project-based Section 8. Total development cost for the 268 units is over $21 million.

LHA is one of four agencies highlighted on the RAD HUD website.

Read all about LHA and the other RAD initiatives at the HUD website:
http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=RAD_CS_9-19-14.pdf

FHLB ATLANTA


June 2014

FHLB ATLANTA ANNOUNCES 2014 AFFORDABLE HOUSING GRANT AWARDS
JUDD K ROTH REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CLIENTS ELIGIBLE FOR $5.5 MILLION IN GRANTS

On June 18, 2014, Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (FHLBank Atlanta) announced that it has awarded $24.5 million to assist in the funding of 60 affordable housing projects in 13 states and the District of Columbia as part of its 2014 Affordable Housing Program (AHP). Thirteen of those grants totaling $5,493,400 were awarded to clients of Judd K. Roth Real Estate Development (JKRRED).

"These awards, totaling nearly $5.5 million, will help federal home loan bank of atlanta grant secure much-needed housing for homeless families, disabled veterans, Native Americans, elderly and youth-at-risk in projects that will provide long-term affordability and supportive services," commented Judd Roth.

Click here for a brief description of projects that were funded under the consultation of Judd K. Roth Real Estate Development.



Источник: http://www.jkrred.com/news.php

How to Save on Your Down Payment with an FHLB Grant

The included content is intended for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as professional advice. Additional terms and conditions apply. Not all applicants will qualify. Consult with a finance professional for tax advice or a mortgage professional to address your mortgage questions or concerns. This is an advertisement. Prepared 3/4/2021.

*Disclaimer for Maryland Mortgage Program scenario:

THIS PRODUCT OR SERVICE HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED OR ENDORSED BY ANY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY, AND THIS OFFER IS NOT BEING MADE BY AN AGENCY OF THE GOVERNMENT. For more information and additional requirements of the Maryland Mortgage Program, please visit: www.MMP.Maryland.gov.

“With MMP + FHLB” financing based on the home sales price shown in the chart above with a first and second mortgage. First mortgage is a 30-year FHA fixed-rate loan with 102.05% CLTV, 3.625% interest rate, and 4.818% APR. Second mortgage is a 15-year fixed-rate loan with 0% interest. The monthly payment includes combined principal and interest for the first and second mortgage as well as estimated fees for taxes, homeowners insurance, and mortgage insurance.

“Without MMP + FHLB” financing based on the home sales price shown in the chart above with a 30-year FHA fixed-rate loan, $12,950 down payment amount, 3.625% interest rate, and 4.818% APR. The monthly payment includes estimated fees for taxes, homeowners insurance, and mortgage insurance.

Criteria for loan program qualification and interest rates on loan programs will vary based on credit criteria, final amount of down payment, and are subject to current market pricing. APR may vary depending on rate and final loan program. Rates are effective 02/23/2021 and subject to change without notice. The stated range may change or not be available at the time of commitment or lock-in. This is an advertisement and not a guarantee of lending. Terms and conditions apply. All approvals subject to underwriting guidelines. Prepared 02/23/2021.

Источник: https://fhmtg.com/2021/03/04/how-to-save-on-your-down-payment-with-an-fhlb-grant/

1 Replies to “Federal home loan bank of atlanta grant”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *