Expand housing fund’s reach |

Expand housing fund’s reach

The Pennsylvania Housing Trust Fund provides funding for homeowner repairs, rental assistance, housing construction and other projects to communities and individuals in need.

To date, it has funneled $26 million, helping 2,800 households. However, it is available in only 37 of Pennsylvania’s counties.

The state House has unanimously passed House Bill 792, which would expand the fund to all Pennsylvania counties without raising taxes. Now, the bill moves to the Senate. It is critical that senators act quickly so Pennsylvanians in need can benefit this year.

In a recent Housing Alliance study, Pittsburgh has a shortage of 21,000 affordable homes for low-income families. At Habitat for Humanity of Greater Pittsburgh, we see this need daily.

As a nonprofit dedicated to building and repairing homes for local families, Habitat struggles to fund enough projects to meet this overwhelming need. We have over 500 families on our waiting list.

With expansion of the fund, Habitat would be able to renovate more homes and strengthen our region’s neighborhoods.

That’s why I’m asking Sen. Jay Costa to allow our neighbors to receive the assistance they need by ensuring that House Bill 792 or Senate Bill 566 reaches the floor for a vote.

I urge him to vote “yes” like his colleagues in the House.

Please do the same if you agree.

Derek Morris

The writer is volunteer coordinator and community engagement manager for Habitat for Humanity of Greater Pittsburgh.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.