Overview
Title
60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Maintenance Wage Rate Recommendation
Agencies
ELI5 AI
HUD wants to make sure that people who work on certain housing projects get paid the right amount according to the rules, and they are asking for people's thoughts on how to collect this information until May 27, 2025.
Summary AI
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for collecting information related to maintenance wage rate recommendations. This effort is part of their responsibility to enforce prevailing wage requirements for low-income and affordable housing under certain federal regulations. Public Housing Agencies, Indian tribes, and other entities managing specific housing projects are required to pay these wages. The department is inviting public comments on the necessity and effectiveness of the proposed information collection until May 27, 2025.
Abstract
HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has issued a notice inviting public comments on a proposed collection of information related to maintenance wage rate recommendations. This initiative, announced in the Federal Register, aims to ensure that certain wage standards are met within low-income and affordable housing projects. Through this process, HUD seeks feedback to gauge the necessity and efficiency of their information collection practices, as outlined under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Significant Issues and Concerns
While the notice provides a structured request for public input, it falls short in some areas. First and foremost, the potential costs associated with collecting this information and how these costs compare to the benefits are not addressed. Clarifying this could help assess whether the expenditure is justified or could potentially be wasteful. Additionally, the document presumes a level of familiarity with terms such as "Public Housing Agencies" and "Tribally Designated Housing Entities." Not all readers might be familiar with these categories, so further explanation would be beneficial to broaden understanding.
Moreover, the specific forms mentioned (HUD-4750, HUD-4751, and HUD-4752) lack detailed explanation regarding their particular usage. This lack of clarity might lead to confusion among respondents about their obligations or the content of these forms. Similarly, the legal references, such as the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 (USHA) and the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA), are complex and might not be easily understood by everyone. Simplifying these legal references could aid comprehension across a wider audience.
Broader Public Impact
For the general public, this document represents an opportunity to voice opinions about federal oversight on wage standards in housing projects. Such standards aim to assure fair pay for maintenance workers on specific housing projects, which could contribute positively to worker welfare and project accountability. However, without a clear picture of the costs versus benefits, the public might find it challenging to provide informed feedback.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
The notice is likely to have a direct impact on Public Housing Agencies, Indian tribes, and Tribally Designated Housing Entities required to comply with these wage standards. For these stakeholders, the document's lack of detail about form usage and the methods to minimize response burdens could lead to operational uncertainties. On the brighter side, for agencies and entities managing low-income and affordable housing, maintaining federally-compliant wage standards could promote fair labor practices and enhance the reputation of these projects.
In summary, while HUD's initiative to solicit public comments is a commendable step towards transparency and accountability, the document would benefit from addressing the issues of cost-benefit analysis, clearer terminology, and the simplified presentation of complex legal references. Such enhancements could lead to more constructive public engagement and assist stakeholders in navigating their responsibilities more effectively.
Issues
• The notice does not explicitly detail the potential costs associated with collecting the proposed information or the benefits that justify these costs, which might leave room for interpreting whether spending is justified or potentially wasteful.
• The description of entities required to adhere to the wage rate requirements, such as "Public Housing Agencies" and "Tribally Designated Housing Entities," presumes familiarity with these terms and might benefit from further clarification to ensure broad understanding.
• Language specifying the forms (HUD-4750, HUD-4751, HUD-4752) and their particular usage is not detailed, which could make it difficult for respondents to understand their specific obligations and the context of the forms.
• The complex language used in describing the legal and statutory basis for the wage rate recommendations (references to USHA and NAHASDA) may not be easily understandable to all intended audiences without prior knowledge of these statutes.
• The methods for minimizing collection burden are mentioned in general terms (e.g., electronic submission of responses) but lack specific details on implementation, which could create uncertainty for affected respondents.