Community Development and Urban Planning Business Guide
Get Solutions, Not Just Problems
We documented 15 challenges in Community Development and Urban Planning. Now get the actionable solutions — vendor recommendations, process fixes, and cost-saving strategies that actually work.
Skip the wait — get instant access
- All 15 documented pains
- Business solutions for each pain
- Where to find first clients
- Pricing & launch costs
All 15 Documented Cases
Over-subsidizing Developers and Diverting Excess Increment from General Revenues
Commonly 50–100% of all incremental property tax in a district for 20–27 years; studies and best-practices guides flag that over-subsidization can shift millions of dollars from general funds to TIFs over each district life, with individual districts often involving $10M–$50M+ of captured increment.Many TIF districts approve assistance greater than the true financial gap of a project, so incremental property tax that would have gone to general funds, schools, or overlapping taxing bodies is instead captured in the TIF for years longer or at higher levels than necessary. This is a recurring structural revenue bleed because TIF funds are locked in by statute and project plans once approved.
Loss of HUD Funding and Restrictions Due to IDIS and Reporting Violations
$500,000–$10,000,000+ per jurisdiction in reduced or frozen grant access during sanction periodsSustained problems with IDIS drawdowns and performance reporting (e.g., untimely or inaccurate data, failure to complete activities, lack of supporting records) have led HUD to impose sanctions including grant reductions, special conditions, and frozen drawdowns. These actions reduce available funding and delay or halt community development projects.
Misuse and Misappropriation of HUD Funds Hidden Behind IDIS Drawdowns
$100,000–$10,000,000+ per scheme; cumulative national impact in the hundreds of millions of dollars over multiple yearsCriminal and civil fraud cases show program staff and subrecipients misusing CDBG/HOME funds—sometimes fabricating activities or inflating costs—with the funds drawn through IDIS as if they were legitimate. These schemes result in direct financial loss, restitution orders, and severe reputational damage.
Delayed Reimbursement from HUD Due to IDIS Drawdown Errors and Rejections
$10,000–$200,000 per year per grantee in interest/borrowing and lost investment income, depending on grant size and error rateWhen grantees submit IDIS vouchers with errors (wrong activity, wrong fund type, exceeding available balance, or incomplete approvals), payments are delayed or rejected in LOCCS, forcing local governments to carry costs on their own cash for extended periods. This lengthens time‑to‑cash and creates avoidable interest or borrowing costs.