Some public housing facilities are required by law to rent a percentage of the units for full rent, unsubsidised. That means that a percentage of the available apartments are open to anybody who wants to live there, as long as their income can support the rent.
Therefore it doesn’t matter how much money you make. If you like the place, and you want to live there for whatever reasons, and you can afford the rent, you can live there.
I think it’s part of the Equal Housing Opportunities that facilities are required to participate in. Non-discrimination.
There has to be so many handicapped units, so many regular units, so many family units, so many single units and every unit is subject to regular inspections.
Sometimes, those paying full, unsubsidised rent have different privileges than those who receive subsidy. For example, perhaps they are allowed to keep a pet, whereas the federally subsidized tenant can only have a pet if that pet is medically necessary. That tenant has to jump through hoops to prove it.
It’s just the way it is in some states.
I didn’t know that; thank you for clarifying. It actually makes sense in cities with CITY income taxes to entice potential taxpayers to live there - though I don’t know what would induce productive people to live in such close quarters to a number of gibsmedats. In NYC there were complaints recently that the public housing was ending up segregated (many Asians in one newer housing project, for example, while blacks were directed to others). I guess these cities know they can’t have populations that are 95% ungovernable, unassimilated minorities, and they need some productive people in their midst.