Section 8 housing vouchers are vital benefits for low-income individuals and families. Tenants with vouchers generally pay a third of their income on rent. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), which administers the program nationally, pays the landlord the remaining balance.
Vouchers greatly assist low-income, elderly, and disabled individuals and families obtain safe and affordable housing. An individual can keep their voucher for a lifetime, ensuring affordability over time.
An eviction judgment, however, is grounds for termination of a Section 8 voucher. Once a tenant is terminated from the program, there’s a steep challenge in completing an appeal to the loss of their previous voucher and very slim chances of receiving another voucher.
To better understand why Section 8 benefits are terminated, we’ve reviewed records provided by the City of Madison’s Community Development Authority (“CDA”), which manages Section 8 programming for 1,600 of the City’s residents, and the Dane County Housing Authority (“DCHA”), which manages the benefit for all other Dane County residents.
Termination Details
Since 2021, CDA has terminated 98 vouchers for violations to the rules of the program or other forms of non-compliance. The three most common reasons were program non-compliance (38); vacating without notice or approval (31); and owing rent, utilities, or other charges (12). During that same period, DCHA terminated 18 vouchers for violations including failing to comply with recertification (6); an undefined term labeled as “skipping” (6); and other program violations (5) being the most frequently cited reasons.
Evictions were cited 5 times as the reason for voucher terminations between CDA and DCHA. Another 5 terminations by CDA were due to eviction notices being issued or lease violations. Other reasons for terminations included criminal activity (9) and non-communication (5).
Vouchers that were terminated at the tenant’s request or following the death of a tenant were omitted from our review of the information provided by CDA and DCHA.
Eviction and Section 8 Vouchers
Although eviction was cited as the reason for termination relatively infrequently, it’s unclear how often an eviction may have caused other terminations. For instance, a tenant may have vacated after receiving an eviction notice or judgment without notifying their housing caseworker, but the reason their voucher was terminated was technically for “vacating without approval.” Conversely, a voucher-holder may find themselves in eviction court because they were unable to secure permission to move with their voucher.
EDDP’s Efforts Surrounding Section 8
To protect tenants and their vouchers, the EDDP prioritizes legal representation for tenants who receive Section 8 benefits. In 2024, 49 EDDP clients in eviction court reported being voucher-holders. Attorney Heidi Wegleitner of Legal Action of Wisconsin (“LAW”) says it is a priority for LAW to take these cases, both through its partnership with the EDDP and outside, as they are one of the only firms that represent tenants during Section 8 termination proceedings.
Voucher holders typically have 14 days to appeal and contest any significant changes to their benefits, including termination. If requested by the tenant, a public housing authority will hold a hearing where the tenant can inspect the evidence used to make the termination decision, bring witnesses, and make arguments for why they shouldn’t be terminated from the program.
Many tenants do not request these hearings and lose their vouchers without raising important context or facts that may have changed the outcome. Wegleitner says attorneys can play a crucial role by creating records, pulling information to show the vulnerability of the voucher holder’s household, and making the public housing authority meet the burden of proof required in these cases. Outside of cases where public housing authorities are required to terminate a voucher, such as sex- or drug-related crimes, the CDA and DCHA typically have a fair amount of discretion on whether to continue a tenant’s voucher.
Although there are limitation to this data, our analysis may provide a lens for tenants and housing advocates in examining the larger trends surrounding Section 8 terminations. Emphasis should be placed on increasing communication between public housing authorities and tenants. Far too many tenants report being unaware of their rights in these cases and are often forced to seek legal assistance too late in the process.