WS Chronicle

Part 1 

JESS SCHNUR 

THE CHRONICLE 

The Bigger Picture 

Earlier this month, on May 2, the Trump administration submitted its preliminary federal budget proposal for the 2026 fiscal year (FY). In a letter addressed to “The Honorable Susan Collins,” the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, the Executive Office presented a line-by-line analysis of previous FY 2025 spending to reallocate federal funds across the board for all government departments. Upon the conclusion of their reassessment, the administration dubbed their findings “to be laden with spending contrary to the needs of ordinary working Americans and tilted toward funding niche non-governmental organizations and institutions of higher education committed to radical gender and climate ideologies antithetical to the American way of life,” as proclaimed in the letter’s introduction.  

The letter details the intent behind reductions to a plethora of programs as a means of shifting financial burden from the federal government to be transitioned to the state level, under the guise that “Just as the Federal Government has intruded on matters best left to American families, it has intruded on matters best left to the levels of government closest to the people, who understand and respect the needs and desires of their communities far better than the Federal Government ever could,” wrote the Trump Administration. 

Federal Budget Proposal: A Shift in Priorities 

However, amidst a sea of slashes to federal spending, one area was suggested to receive additional funding from the money saved from these cuts: an “unprecedented” increase in defense spending and border security. With a proposal to raise defense spending by 13% – totaling to $1.01 trillion – and a “historic” commitment of a $175 billion investment to Homeland Security, the administration punctuates its priority in “at long last, finally fully [securing] our border,” according to the document.  

In addition, the budget proposal outlined a recommendation to increase funds for “Human Space Exploration” to lunar exploration and Mars-focused programs by $647 million, despite additional pushes to reduce spending on Space Science, Mission Support, and Space Technology listed in the adjacent lines below on the proposal’s roster.  

“Under the proposal, a portion of these increases – at least $325 billion assumed in the budget resolution recently agreed to by the Congress – would be provided through reconciliation, to ensure that our military and other agencies repelling the invasion of our border have the resources needed to complete the mission,” wrote the Trump Administration. “Providing these resources through reconciliation ensures that the money is available when needed, and not held hostage by Democrats to force wasteful non-defense discretionary spending increases as was the case in the President’s first term.” 

Upon receipt of the President’s correspondence, Senator Collins released a statement to comment on the proposed budget shift. “The President’s Budget Request is simply one step in the annual budget process. This request has come to Congress late, and key details still remain outstanding,” said Collins. “Based on my initial review, however, I have serious objections to the proposed freeze in our defense funding given the security challenges we face and to the proposed funding cuts to – and in some cases elimination of – programs like LIHEAP, TRIO, and those that support biomedical research. Ultimately, it is Congress that holds the power of the purse.” 

HUD, FEMA, Other Programs on the Chopping Block 

Among many federal institutions facing potential defunding, including the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Low-Income Heating and Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), one prolific group that is set for the proposed chopping block is the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). According to a memo issued by the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC), the Trump Administration’s proposal would impose an overall reduction of 44% of HUD’s funding from that of FY2025, alongside a 43% cut to HUD’s rental assistance programs. As outlined in the proposal, this would include a restructuring of eligibility for Housing Choice Vouchers (Section 8) to provide a maximum of two years of housing assistance, except for homeless and “at-risk” individuals. 

“The proposals outlined in this preliminary request are not only untenable, they are unconscionable,” said NLIHC’s Interim President and CEO Renee Willis in the memo. “At a time of rapidly rising rents, increasing economic hardship, and a record number of people experiencing homelessness, the Administration should be asking Congress to expand – not slash – federal investments in affordable housing and homelessness assistance, and working with Congress and communities to ensure these vital resources are available to every household in need.” 

Local Impact of Funding Cuts 

Amidst the uncertainty currently faced by HUD, The Chronicle spoke with the Housing Authority of Winston-Salem’s (HAWS) Executive Vice President of Operations, Ted Ortiviz, to better understand what these budget cuts could mean for residents of Forsyth County.  

Through the City of Winston-Salem, HAWS’ mission entails “Developing People, Property, and Prosperity.” Through its partnership with HUD, the Housing Authority serves members of the community in vulnerable populations to make safe and affordable housing accessible to all residents of the county. Through its facilitation of programs such as the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV), Public Housing, Affordable Market Rate Housing, Resident Opportunity and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) Program, Choice Neighborhood Initiative (CNI) Partnership, Financial Literacy, Property Management, and the Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Program, HAWS has been a harbinger of affordable housing in the community since its establishment in 1941.  

“Over the decades, HAWS has implemented various initiatives to provide safe, decent, and affordable housing for low- and moderate-income residents,” Ortiviz told The Chronicle. “A notable example is the Choice Neighborhood Initiative (CNI), aimed at revitalizing the public housing property, Cleveland Avenue. This project plans to deliver over 400 mixed-income housing units, blending affordable and market-rate options to foster diverse communities. The first phase, known as the Brown School Lofts, has been completed and is fully occupied.” 

According to Ortiviz, the Housing Authority manages over 4,500 tenant-based (HCV) vouchers, 278 Mainstream vouchers, 144 Veterans Affair Supportive Housing (VASH) vouchers, 371 project-based vouchers, while also managing and providing operating subsidies to 1,446 units of public housing in 16 conventional public housing and HOPE VI developments. 

As of Jan. 1, 2025, HUD also required HAWS to implement the Small Area Fair Market Rent (SAFMR) payment standards, which adjust voucher payment standards based on ZIP codes to promote greater access to higher opportunities for families across various neighborhoods, such as those with better schools and employment prospects. HAWS will be holding a symposium for landlords this month to discuss the program further. 

HAWS Responds: Adapting to Uncertainty 

With the looming possibility of HUD losing a large portion of its federal funding lies an impending inevitability in reducing the scope of eligibility for individuals and families across the county, should the budget cuts come to fruition. Consequently, HAWS would face staffing adjustments to reflect the decrease in those receiving assistance. 

With a myriad of misinformation being published regarding the proposed HCV limits, Ortiviz clarifies that the limits would only be imposed upon “able-bodied” individuals, excluding disabled and elderly individuals from the voucher’s stipulation. “If that is a part of the bill that’s passed by Congress, we follow the law, we will abide by the bill, and we would roll out criteria based on HUD’s direction on how we would implement that,” said Ortiviz. “But transitional housing usually has an 18-month window to get folks in, to get them back on their feet and in the right direction. I’ve worked with many organizations that have transitional housing, but, you know, putting a two-year cap on folks, it could be devastating.”  

Much of the controversial proposal’s uncertainty has furthermore circulated throughout a rather vulnerable climate for the county, as an ongoing shortage of affordable housing continues to pervade the local market. “As of 2024, there is a deficit of approximately 13,000 affordable rental units for these households,” said Ortiviz. “HAWS’ initiatives, including the CNI project and HCV program, aim to mitigate this shortage, but challenges remain due to funding constraints and increasing housing costs. If the potential budget cuts occur, the most pressing ‘needs’ will be finding safe, decent, affordable housing for our most vulnerable families.” Households earning 30% of the area median income, explained Ortiviz, are especially vulnerable to the persistent shortage.  

The Ripple Effect: Economic Consequences Beyond Housing 

Despite much of the language of these proposals tailoring itself to those who directly rely on HUD-funded assistance, there is an underlying “ripple effect,” according to Ortiviz, in which these impacts would extend themselves the entirety of the community, especially those in the small-business sector. “Our housing choice voucher is a $32 million program … We send out housing assistance payments of $3 million per month to those landlords. So, all of our landlords will be affected by those cuts,” explained Ortiviz. “And they have painters, they have HVAC, they have plumbers, they have all these contractors that are working with them. Those folks, you know, that may not be available to them … And right now, as you understand the program, our participants pay no more than 30% of their gross income towards housing, while if they’re paying 60 or 70% of their income towards housing, then they’re not going to have disposable income to go out and spend [any money at the] store, [nor on] gas, food, medication, those kind of things. So, that’s where it’ll have that major ripple effect and it’ll be felt across the country.” 

Looking to an Uncertain Future 

While there remains a foreboding uncertainty for programs such as HUD while awaiting Congress’s vote on the President’s proposals, HAWS reaffirms its continued support for those in the community despite the precarious position of federal funding. “HAWS has and will continue to develop creative opportunities to reduce the impact(s) of federal cuts,” assured Ortiviz. “We have positioned ourselves well by cutting overhead costs by moving across town (from our downtown office) and diversified our portfolio by adding LIHTC and market-rate units. Our mixed-unit development(s) costs are reduced by integrating market rate units and commercial spaces while fostering social interaction and creating a strong sense of community.” The Housing Authority is also currently partnered with a plethora of organizations, such as the Continuum of Care (CoC), the Forsyth County Health Department, Veterans Bridge Home, Connecting Communities, and the Piedmont Triad Regional Council (PTRC) to streamline a constant system of support for residents. Through needs assessments, community workshops, and resident committees, these partnered institutions work to identify and supply services to meet and maintain the county’s evolving needs and promote inclusivity and sustainability within the community.  

“The cuts proposed by the President’s FY 2026 budget are extremely alarming,” concluded Ortiviz. “These cuts would hurt families, our partner landlords, and the local economies. The country is in the midst of an affordable housing crisis and less funding is not the answer.”