Yes in God's Backyard Act

Bill Number: H.R. 7152
Origin Chamber: House
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 2
Policy Area: Housing and Community Development
Status: Introduced
Latest Action: 2026-01-20: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Last Updated: 2026-03-28T08:06:25Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The "Yes in God's Backyard Act" (H.R. 7152) aims to expand the supply of affordable rental housing by providing technical assistance and grants to faith-based organizations (non-profits tied to religious groups), institutions of higher education (colleges and universities), and local governments. It focuses on using underutilized land owned by these entities to develop or preserve housing that low-income families, homeless individuals, veterans, people with disabilities, and other vulnerable groups can afford, while removing local barriers to such projects.

Key Provisions

The bill amends the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (a 1990 law that supports housing programs) by adding a new subtitle with two main components:

Definitions (Section 290):

Establishes clear terms, such as:

Affordable rental housing: Rentals where monthly rent is no more than 30% of a household's income, targeted at households earning up to 100% of the area's median income (AMI).
Covered household: Low-income families (up to 100% AMI).
Other terms include "at risk of homelessness" (from existing federal law), "faith-based organization" (defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, and including groups supported by the federal Partnership Center), and "institution of higher education" (from the Higher Education Act).

Technical Assistance Program (Section 291):
HUD must create a program offering free guidance and resources to help faith-based organizations, colleges/universities, and local governments overcome obstacles to building or maintaining affordable housing on their properties.
Resources cover:
How to convert unused land into affordable units or preserve existing ones.
Targeting specific groups, like families earning up to 60% AMI, homeless or at-risk individuals (including veterans), people with disabilities, intergenerational families (multi-generational households), and residents of well-resourced areas (neighborhoods with good schools, jobs, and services).
Federal funding options, best practices for development (e.g., partnering with builders, land use decisions), and ways for local governments to ease zoning or regulatory hurdles.
HUD must consult with the federal Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships and agencies like the Departments of Agriculture, Treasury, and Health and Human Services.
All materials must be publicly available online.
Funding: $25 million authorized for fiscal year 2026; $10 million annually for 2027–2031.

Challenge Grant Program (Section 292):
HUD will award competitive grants to states, local governments, metropolitan planning organizations (regional planning bodies), or multi-jurisdiction groups that already have policies to reduce barriers for affordable housing on faith-based or educational properties.
Application Requirements: Applicants must show existing barrier-removal policies, share a public plan for grant use, gather community feedback, and address it in the final proposal.
Preferences: Priority for projects serving extremely low-income families (under 30% AMI), homeless/at-risk groups, people with disabilities, intergenerational families, or other special needs in opportunity-rich areas.
Allowable Uses: Funds can support:
Identifying and fixing local rules that block projects (e.g., zoning changes).
Outreach and training for faith-based groups, schools, and partners.
Sub-grants or low-interest loans to build or preserve housing.
Other related activities approved by HUD.
Grantees must report progress for monitoring.
Funding: $50 million authorized annually for fiscal years 2026–2031, with up to 10% for HUD administration.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

This bill adds a new subtitle (G) to Title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, introducing targeted technical assistance and grant programs without altering core elements of the 1990 law.
It builds on existing definitions from laws like the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (for homelessness terms) and the United States Housing Act (for income levels), but expands focus to properties owned by faith-based organizations and higher education institutions.
No repeal or overhaul of prior housing programs; instead, it integrates new tools to leverage underused land for affordability.

Potential Impacts

On Government Agencies: HUD gains new responsibilities for program administration, consultation, and data collection, potentially increasing workload but with dedicated funding. Local and state governments may see streamlined processes for housing development, reducing administrative burdens.
On Citizens: Could increase access to affordable rentals for low- and extremely low-income households, homeless individuals, veterans, people with disabilities, and families in need, especially in desirable neighborhoods. This might lower homelessness rates and promote equitable housing distribution.
On International Relations: No direct impact, as the bill is focused on domestic housing policy.
Overall, it may boost housing supply in high-demand areas by encouraging partnerships, though success depends on local adoption and funding appropriations.

Main Stakeholders Affected

Faith-based organizations and institutions of higher education: Primary beneficiaries, gaining technical help and funding opportunities to repurpose land for housing.
Local and state governments: Eligible for grants to reform policies and support projects, but must demonstrate commitment to barrier removal.
Low-income and vulnerable populations: Households earning up to 100% AMI (especially under 60%), homeless or at-risk people, veterans, individuals with disabilities, intergenerational families, and special needs groups stand to gain from more affordable, accessible units.
Community partners and developers: Involved in outreach, construction, and management, with incentives for equitable projects.
Federal agencies: HUD leads implementation, with input from the Partnership Center and others like Treasury (for financing) and Health and Human Services (for supportive services).

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: Strengthens federal support for affordable housing under existing frameworks like the National Affordable Housing Act, emphasizing public-private partnerships. Requires public input on grant plans, promoting transparency and community involvement. No new enforcement mechanisms, but ties funding to policy changes, which could lead to legal challenges if local barriers involve zoning disputes.
Constitutional: Involves faith-based organizations, raising potential First Amendment concerns (e.g., church-state separation), but aligns with existing federal allowances for such partnerships (via the Partnership Center) as long as funds support secular housing goals without promoting religion.
Political: Encourages collaboration across sectors, potentially appealing to bipartisan interests in housing affordability and community development. As an amendment to a long-standing law, it could influence future housing bills by highlighting underused institutional land, though implementation relies on congressional appropriations.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Barragán, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44]

Cosponsors (9)

Rep. Brown, Shontel M. [D-OH-11], Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10], Rep. Torres, Ritchie [D-NY-15], Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Espaillat, Adriano [D-NY-13], Rep. Ansari, Yassamin [D-AZ-3], Rep. Harder, Josh [D-CA-9], Rep. Latimer, George [D-NY-16]