An Act amending the act of April 9, 1929 (P.L.343, No.176), known as The Fiscal Code, in additional special funds and restricted accounts, establishing the Survivor-Centered, Accessible, Fair and Empo . . .wering Housing Trust Fund; and making an interfund transfer.
House Bill 287 would create a new special fund in the State Treasury called the Survivor-Centered, Accessible, Fair and Empowering Housing Trust Fund, administered by the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency. The fund is intended to support emergency, transitional, and permanent housing for victims and survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, human trafficking, and stalking, as well as certain immediate family members. The bill states that housing and related services must be available regardless of sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation, and it frames housing as a right rather than something that must be “earned” through a housing-readiness requirement.
To seed the fund, the bill would transfer $1 million from the General Fund and create additional revenue streams, including a $10 surcharge on each deed or mortgage filing. It would also allow voluntary $5 contributions during online driver’s license, identification card, and vehicle registration renewals through the Department of Transportation, along with gifts, grants, and donations. The Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency would use the money to award grants to domestic violence programs and rape crisis programs that operate housing programs, including support for rent, relocation, security deposits, furniture, homeownership-related financing, and other housing needs.
The bill would also impose reporting and oversight requirements. The agency would have to adopt a policy statement, review it annually, and submit yearly reports to legislative committees detailing revenues, expenditures, grantees, people assisted, and county-level spending and outcomes. The Auditor General would be required to audit the fund within three years and then at least every three years afterward. The act would take effect 60 days after enactment.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is strongly supportive of survivor housing access and anti-homelessness goals, with an emphasis on equity and low-barrier access to services. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented floor or committee debate to indicate broader legislative sentiment beyond the bill’s sponsors and framing.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be the funding mechanism and the policy approach. The $10 surcharge on real estate filings and the redirection of General Fund money could draw scrutiny from taxpayers, the real estate industry, or budget hawks. The bill’s explicit nondiscrimination language and its rejection of housing-readiness prerequisites may also prompt debate over program eligibility standards, administrative discretion, and whether the state should create a dedicated fund for this population rather than using existing housing or victim-services programs.
HB287 would amend the Fiscal Code to create a new restricted fund and authorize new revenue sources, including a General Fund transfer, deed and mortgage filing surcharge, and optional DMV contribution checkoffs. It would give the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency authority to administer grants to domestic violence and rape crisis programs that provide housing assistance, thereby expanding state-level support for survivor housing services and adding new reporting, audit, and policy requirements for the agency and the Auditor General.
The bill is framed in strongly supportive terms, emphasizing survivor-centered housing access, stability, and equity for victims of violence and trafficking. Because no committee discussion or voting record is provided, there is no evidence of formal opposition or support beyond the bill’s introduction and sponsor list, but the text suggests a clear policy preference for expanding housing assistance and reducing barriers to entry.
Likely areas of contention include the funding structure, especially the $1 million General Fund transfer and the $10 surcharge on deed and mortgage filings, which may be viewed as new costs on property transactions. Another possible point of debate is the bill’s policy choice to treat housing as a right and to prohibit housing-readiness requirements, which could raise questions about program standards and agency discretion. The nondiscrimination requirement covering sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation may also be a focal point for disagreement among stakeholders.