1 page, 2,065,488 bytes, sha256 a5d514cc3dce5deefd2c4a6f62bc3b4e23f624a40b56c6d159b5ac66b87f7b06, fetched 2026-08-29. The current mandatory student form, listed under 'Tax Credit Required Forms' on IHFA's compliance page beside the manual's statement that no other forms will be accepted. Dated from the form's own printed 'Revised September 2025', not from the URL or the directory. Four mutually exclusive household options (no students; at least one named non-student; all students but at least one named part-time, with verification of part-time status required; all full-time students) and, on the last, all five statutory exception questions with the proof each requires named on the form: marriage certificate or joint tax return; tax return for the single-parent exception; TANF award letter or third-party verification; foster care paperwork from the welfare agency; and for the JTPA-similar exception, a programme that 'must receive federal, state, or local government funding and have a mission similar to Job Training Partnership'. Signed under penalty of perjury by every household member aged 18 or older, with an undertaking to notify management immediately of any change in student status - which is the evidentiary counterpart to the lease term the manual requires. Cited by id.lihtc.student_status_certification_annual_including_exempt_properties.

2 pages, 105,603 bytes, sha256 e73d267c01fd1893c720eded0ea24f78344688c25933a7ebf40f1c3b85617618. Scanned/image PDF (no text layer). Listed on IHFA's Tax Credit Compliance page under 'Tax Credit (LIHTC) and HOME Compliance Manuals' beside the 2020 manual, which is what makes it part of the current corpus rather than an archived letter. It quotes and then amends the 2020 manual's flat 5% rent cap, effective November 1, 2022: increases over 10% must be submitted for IHFA review PRIOR to the tenant being notified (Rent Increase Request Form, with rent roll and financials on request); increases over 5% require a 60-day notice to the tenant; rent may be increased only once in any 12-month period regardless of lease type; vacant units may be re-rented at the maximum published rents; LIHTC tenancies may not be terminated without good cause. Self-described as 'a temporary revision to the existing policy' pending a manual revision 'which should occur in 2023' that has not appeared as of 2026-08-25.

2 pages, 296,826 bytes, sha256 04c5b865716fa2c4fe5718320897b332dae66dec536f51e5549ead67d016ce7a, fetched 2026-08-29. 'This is the predetermined file order for electronic submissions.' Prescribes one PDF per tenant file labelled with unit number, head-of-household surname and certification type, recertifications uploaded as independent PDFs, and unit transfers communicated when the rent roll is submitted. Sets the move-in stack (IHFA TIC, Household Questionnaire, Certification of Student Status, then income information, asset information beginning with the Household Asset Self-Certification and the Over Asset Limitation Calculation Worksheet where applicable, lease information including one VAWA lease addendum per adult, application information, miscellaneous) and the recertification stack, expressly noting that where a unit is LIHTC and HOME both certifications are required and that a full annual recertification is used 'unless a tenant income self-certification is permissible'. Properties already converted to digital files 'may use an alternate order if that order is consistent among all files'. This document is FIVE YEARS NEWER than the compliance manual and IHFA has not reconciled it with the manual's 21-year hard-copy retention rule; both are recorded. Cited by id.lihtc.procorem_mandatory_and_three_week_file_upload.

1 page, 65,444 bytes, sha256 ad75d622d14b086d6d2b7d00b7837ec31a6e4f3280e3417860a8f0a67290d57e, fetched 2026-08-29. Dated from the memo's own face ('June 3, 2025'). Listed on IHFA's Tax Credit Compliance page under 'Tax Credit (LIHTC) and HOME Compliance Manuals' beside the HOME Compliance Manual (June 26, 2020), which is what makes it current policy rather than an archived letter. Three things it establishes that appear nowhere else in the corpus: (1) 'IHFA is the Participating Jurisdiction (PJ) for the State of Idaho with the exception of City of Boise, which is the PJ for HOME funds within its city boundaries' - a jurisdictional carve-out inside a state overlay; (2) it quotes HOME Compliance Manual p. 4 s. 1.07 verbatim, including the remedy 'the owner may be required to reduce the rents and make restitution to affected tenants'; and (3) it partially waives that section's own mechanic - 'We have waived the requirement to submit HOME/HTF/NSP rent increases with the annual reports, but an approval is required to increase rent' - substituting a request form distributed by email and not published on the site. IHFA states the occasion for the memo: 'There are numerous owner/agents refunding significant amounts of rent back to tenants.' A scanned page with a partial text layer; the letterhead OCRs as 'www.,aanonous,ng.com' and the body reads cleanly. Cited by id.home.rent_increase_prior_written_approval.

1 page, 105,156 bytes, sha256 f6c12c5118c9da90dd977c1b6b0fc3eeb45f4cb1aca13b52b7697a79c976950c. Listed on IHFA's Tax Credit Compliance page as 'LIHTC Memo - HOTMA (Dec 3, 2024)'. IHFA's operative HOTMA implementation statement: HOTMA executes in all unsubsidized units on January 1, 2025; units layered with Project-Based Section 8 or Rural Development are exempt until July 1, 2025; Housing Choice Voucher tenancies are NOT exempt; all move-ins effective January 1, 2025 and later must be HOTMA compliant on IHFA's published HOTMA forms; recertifications effective May 1, 2025 and later must be on the HOTMA forms (paperwork collection beginning January 1, 2025); failure to implement on an unsubsidized unit 'will be a finding and may reduce the audit score'.

4 pages (3-page certificate plus Ownership and Management Updates sheet), 2,223,418 bytes, sha256 1b843eadc48147de5691d2f1def2702a72f9cae80171c134a7b7ca36bd0ea1a2. Listed under 'Tax Credit Required Forms' with the note in the manual that no other forms will be accepted. Twenty-three numbered certifications made under penalty of perjury; only an owner or general partner may sign. Three carry state overlay weight: question 5 (an ANNUAL Student Self-Certification received for each low-income household - the evidence side of IHFA's 100%-project annual self-certification requirement), question 9 (suitability for occupancy certified to 'Uniform Physical Condition Standards (UPCS) as formerly defined by HUD' - confirming IHFA had not moved to NSPIRE as of December 2024), and question 17 plus the attached update sheet (the reporting channel for ownership and management changes).

Cited for what only the agency's own library can establish: which edition of each document is current, and the revision dates the forms themselves carry. Read 2026-08-29 it lists exactly one 'Tax Credit (LIHTC) Manual' dated June 26, 2020, confirming that the 2020 manual has NOT been superseded six years on despite the October 2022 rent-increase memo promising a revision 'which should occur in 2023'; the two memos the corpus already carries ('Tax Credit Memo - Rent Increases (Oct 21, 2022)' and 'LIHTC Memo - HOTMA (Dec 3, 2024)'); a 'HOME Compliance Manual (June 26, 2020)' and a 'HOME Memo - Rent Increases (June 3, 2025)'; and a 'Tax Credit Required Forms' section listing the eight forms the manual makes mandatory plus later additions - a 2026 Tenant Guide, HOTMA IHFA TIC, HOTMA Over Asset Limitation Calculation Worksheet, LIHTC Annual Tenant Income Self-Certification, Household Asset Self-Certification, Certification of Zero Income, Documentation of Unit Transfer, Building Casualty Loss Notification, Electronic File Stacking Guide, Notice of Intent to Transfer Ownership and Notice of Management Change. Weighted persuasive rather than binding because a document library is evidence of currency, not itself a rule; every substantive obligation is cited to the manual, memo or form it appears in.

NOTE 2026-08-28: this record's url is HUD's Multifamily HOTMA resource hub, which links the notice rather than being it, so its hash tracks HUD's web team and not the guidance. The notice itself is src.hud.notice_h_2023_10_rev3 (Revision 3, issued 16 April 2026, 999,124 bytes). Cite the rev3 record for anything that turns on the notice's text; this record is retained because existing rules cite it and the corpus is append-only.

This record identifies the notice document. sources.json's existing src.hud.notice_h_2023_10 carries url https://www.hud.gov/hud-partners/multifamily-hotma, which is HUD's Multifamily HOTMA resource page -- a hub of training decks, FAQs and one-pagers that merely links the notice. Hashing that page monitors HUD's web team, not the notice. This record is the notice as actually served. Fetched 2026-08-28: 999,124 bytes, 129 pages, sha256 b503b4988cc2bba16a1e6f3e1d05a1c76eb86e052fd66dad79b4fe81d63b4ff0. Edition established from the document's own face, not from the URL (the URL segment '2023-10hsgn' would have dated it to 2023 and been wrong by two and a half years): the special-attention block reads 'Notice H 2023-10/PIH 2023-27 (Revision 3) / Issued: April 16, 2026 / This notice was originally issued September 29, 2023 and reissued February 2, 2024 / Expires: This notice remains in effect until amended, superseded, or rescinded.' The revision log inside the notice is headed 'Changes Made on April XX, 2026' -- HUD left the placeholder in -- so April 16, 2026 is taken from the cover block, which is the only complete date the document states for Revision 3. PDF metadata (Power PDF Create, CreationDate 2026-05-12) describes when the file was generated and is deliberately not used as the issue date. Attachment J, Table J2 (Verification Hierarchy) begins on printed page 122 = PDF page 122, which is exactly the page pa.lihtc.certification.hud_verification_hierarchy points at. J.5 and its narrative run pages 120-124. This is a JOINT Housing/PIH notice: agency_id is set to hud_multifamily to match the corpus's existing entry, but the notice binds PIH programs (HCV, Public Housing, Mod Rehab, Mod Rehab SRO) on the same terms and hud_pih has an equal claim to it. INTEGRATION NOTE, for whoever folds this in: the existing src.hud.notice_h_2023_10 entry is not wrong so much as thin -- published 2023-09-29 (the original issuance), no version, no hash, and a landing-page url. It should either be repointed at this url with the Revision 3 facts recorded, or kept as the original-issuance record with this one carrying Revision 3. Deciding that means editing sources.json, which authoring agents are forbidden to touch, so it is left here rather than done. Six rules already cite src.hud.notice_h_2023_10; none of them should be repointed silently.

19 pages, 493,649 bytes, sha256 f978b21370d0fcd7d06d4481fd4474c8eae9340bdb503996910a0694e6a0efe5, fetched 2026-08-30. NO PUBLICATION DATE IS RECORDED. The cover prints 'Inclusionary Affordable Housing Implementation and Monitoring Procedures / 2020' and nothing else; there is no revision line, no footer date, no adoption recital and no signature block. The PDF's internal CreationDate is 25 November 2019 and its ModDate 20 April 2020 -- neither is on the document's face, and the URL path segment '2020/04' is a WordPress upload directory and is evidence of nothing. The manual implements O-21167 N.S., which was adopted 28 January 2020 and took effect 1 July 2020. Sections used: the opening conflict clause (the Inclusionary Regulations control over this Manual); II (In Lieu Fee phase-in and CCI escalation); III (combinations); IV.B (Declaration recorded senior to all monetary liens, first lien position, separate subordination agreement); V (rent = 1/12 of 30 percent of the applicable AMI, including rent and all tenant paid utilities, fees and charges, as adjusted for household size); VI (for-sale maximum sales price at 35 percent of income, 5 percent down, 30-year fixed); VIII (alternative development schedule and phasing); IX.A (monitoring, 55 years from certificate of occupancy, Commission certification of each prospective household before occupancy); IX.B and Exhibit D (initial $2,500 fee, $150 per unit per year, CPI-U San Diego County escalation, $100 hourly for high-volume monitoring, attorney's fee reimbursement); Exhibit A note (gross rent definition and the owner-required-fee deduction); Exhibit C (for-sale equity share table). EXHIBIT A'S RENT TABLE ITSELF IS AN IMAGE WITH NO TEXT LAYER and is in any event the 2019 table; the operative table is the separately published Income and Rent Calculations chart. SECTION IV.A CROSS-REFERENCES MARKETING REQUIREMENTS 'as set forth in Section IX below' AND SECTION IX CONTAINS NONE -- it is titled 'Ongoing Monitoring'. Either a marketing section was cut before publication or the cross-reference is wrong.

129 pages, 1,203,384 bytes, sha256 947aa9d730f1c9c4b9788d5a50b163eda940f504fef8bb9e30c930b84dc97a97, fetched 2026-08-29. The date is taken off the document's own cover, which prints 'Effective Date: July 25, 2024'; the PDF's internal CreationDate is 2024-08-23, i.e. the file was produced a month after the stated effective date, so the URL path segment '2024-08' is NOT the document date. Sections used for the San Francisco overlay: I(E)-(G) (document hierarchy, Planning Code Section 176 penalties up to $1,000/day, MOHCD's right to request further documentation, pp. 2-3); II(A)-(C) (household definition, minimum one person per bedroom, three-year non-homeowner rule, pp. 6-7); III opening (the MOHCD income limit series and the express refusal to apply a high-housing-cost adjustment, p. 10); IV(A)(1) (ownership AMI tiers, p. 25); IV(D)(4)-(6) (insurance with the City as additional insured, annual occupancy monitoring, title changes, p. 41); V(A)(1) (rental AMI tiers, p. 52); V(B)(2)-(6) (MOHCD lease-up monitoring, marketing minimums, DAHLIA lottery, offers in rank order, pp. 53-55); V(B)(11) (rent subsidies, p. 58); V(E)(3)-(7) (BMR Renter Acknowledgement, twelve-month lease, all adults on the lease, one-month deposit cap, p. 64); V(F)(1)-(4) (annual recertification on tax returns with the ~120-day lead, 90-day renter cure, the 200%-of-AMI continued occupancy ceiling and 90-day vacate, permissible rent increases, pp. 65-66); VI(D) (Use Restriction recording and the semiannual construction progress update, p. 69); VI(F)(5) (five-year file retention and MOHCD audit, p. 73); VI(M)(2)-(5) (marketing firm qualifications, marketing timeline, open houses, signage, Certificate of Preference mailing, pp. 92-95); VI(N)(3)-(4) (the eight-month pricing request, the 60-day validity of a pricing determination, and the bedrooms-plus-one / 30% rent calculation with its three utility tiers, pp. 83-85); VIII(B)(1) (the TCAC and CDLAC layering procedure, pp. 103-104).

22 pages, 580,005 bytes, sha256 3ead3e46c2c9ee43e3cb3ee132d6265034895742e2e6f6a084fd45daa0bb9f68, fetched 2026-08-29. Date off the document's own face: every page footer prints 'Last Revised 04/01/25'. A blank template with bracketed fill-ins, not an executed instrument. THE TERM IS THE HEADLINE AND IT IS THE SHORTER OF THE TWO CITY FORMS: 'AFFORDABILITY PERIOD - A period commencing on the Completion Date and continuing for 20 years', where Completion Date is 'the date when construction of the Apartment Units upon the Property is completed and City has issued a certificate of occupancy for the Project'. Other boilerplate that binds every unassisted IZ property: Annual Income defined at 24 CFR 5.609; Eligible Students defined as students eligible for the federal Pell Grant; Median Family Income defined as HUD's figure for the Minneapolis/St. Paul MSA adjusted for family size; the IZ Unit schedule with blanks for SRO, efficiency, one-, two- and three-bedroom units and for bedrooms; the required lease clauses including consent to eviction on 30 days notice for a material misrepresentation in the Eligibility Certification and notice that subletting is strictly prohibited except as approved by the City; six-year record retention after termination of the Affordability Period; the bar on master leasing IZ Units as short-term rentals and on locating IZ Units on floors with master-leased short-term rentals; the ban on fees not customarily charged in rental housing; and the requirement to contract directly with the Certifying Entity and pay it on annual invoicing at the City's published fee schedule.

24 pages, 641,503 bytes, sha256 11c782017d0dee36349561ee2e285bd6d403e4302fee38da4a4c92265bb8fee9, fetched 2026-08-29. Date off the face: the footer prints 'LAST UPDATED APRIL 1, 2025' and the header block reads 'SAR\\INCLUSIONARY ZONING\\TIF RLO CONTRACT'. THIS IS EXHIBIT F TO THE CITY'S INCLUSIONARY ZONING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT, not a stand-alone instrument: its recitals say the City 'agreed to provide Developer with Revenue Loss Offset Assistance of significant value in exchange for Developer's agreement to comply with the requirements of this Declaration', and that the financial assistance 'is sufficient consideration for executing and filing this Declaration in lieu of the other options available' under Chapter 550. THE ONLY SUBSTANTIVE DIFFERENCE THIS PASS ESTABLISHED IS THE TERM -- 'AFFORDABILITY PERIOD - A period commencing on the Completion Date and continuing for 30 years' against 20 in the unassisted form -- but the difference in the COMPLIANCE MANUAL is much larger: annual recertification by the Certifying Entity and the 140-percent over-income vacate rule attach only to Revenue Loss Offset Assistance projects, and three of the four remedies for uncured noncompliance are tax-increment remedies that only reach them.

The statute supplies four things the regulations do not. 6-1041.03(a) fixes the affordability standard at approximately 30 percent of annual income for rent AND utilities and requires the rent and price schedule to be published in the D.C. Register. 6-1041.04(b)(2) sets a self-executing rent-overcharge fine of the excess plus 10 percent, continuing until the owner proves the rent has been reduced. 6-1041.05(a)(2) is the source of the recorded covenant and of its term -- 'for so long as the development remains in existence'. 6-1041.09 is the District's own annual report to the Council and the Zoning Commission, which is an agency obligation and not an owner's.

The operative dollars for every District inclusionary unit, and the only place the utility deduction is quantified. Three facts a specialist needs from it: Maximum Allowable Rent is Maximum Housing Cost MINUS tenant-paid utilities AND minus any required fee including mandatory amenity and administrative fees; the utility estimates in Schedule 1 are DCHA figures from 2016 expressly 'retained for this price schedule'; and the eight-year policy of capping annual movement at 3 percent ended with this edition, which rises 5.95 percent in line with MFI. The schedule also prints 30, 100 and 120 percent MFI columns that are NOT inclusionary zoning levels -- it says IZ units exist only at 50, 60 and 80 percent -- and reading a 120 percent row as an IZ limit is the obvious way to misuse it.

121,016 bytes of HTML, sha256 0de0e394f8c37cb03ff7f740b7d4fabe5d5b9eafded130e85f8f7531af1cbb30, fetched 2026-08-30. `published` is null because the page carries no publication or revision date; only the effective date, which is on its face ('effective May 1, 2026'). Carries five tables: incomes by percent of median for affordable rental units at 80/60/50/40/30 percent for household sizes 1-6; rents by percent of median for unit sizes efficiency through 4 bedrooms at the same bands; 2026 homeownership programme income limits for MIPAP and Affordable Dwelling Units (identical to the 80 percent rental column); and 2024 CSBG limits. THE RENT TABLE DOES NOT RECONCILE WITH THE INCOME TABLE IN FIVE OF TWENTY-FIVE CELLS. Twenty cells reproduce exactly as 30 percent of the income limit for a household of 1.5 persons per bedroom (studio = 1 person), divided by twelve. The five that do not: efficiency at 80 percent published $2,362 against $2,326 computed (+1.55%); 3-BR at 80 percent $3,455 against $3,467 (-0.35%); and 4-BR at 60, 50 and 40 percent published $2,853, $2,377 and $1,902 against $2,890, $2,408 and $1,927 (each about -1.3%), even though the same 4-BR row's 30 and 80 percent cells are exact. The INCOME table has its own anomaly: every cell is an exact multiple of the 50 percent column (0.6/0.8/1.2/1.6) except the five-person 80 percent cell, $144,520 where 1.6 x $89,700 is $143,520. Unlike King County, Arlington's 80 percent column is the uncapped 1.6 x very low income figure. Two notes on the face fix the method: incomes are 'based on the number of persons in the household, not on the size of the unit' and rents are 'based on size of the unit, not on number of persons living in the unit'; and one fixes the rent basis: 'If tenants pay utilities, the rent charged will be adjusted downward from the amounts above by the estimated costs of those utilities.' NO UTILITY ALLOWANCE SCHEDULE OR METHOD IS PUBLISHED ANYWHERE LOCATED THIS PASS.

Indiana's list is the federal seven, with an express carve-out permitting discrimination against a person convicted of the illegal manufacture or distribution of a controlled substance.

The statutory basis for Section 514 Farm Labor Housing loans, and the source of the STATUTORY definition of 'domestic farm labor' at subsection (f)(3), which is broader on its face than the regulatory definition at 7 CFR 3560.11: the statute reaches a person who 'receives a substantial portion of his or her income from primary production of agricultural or aquacultural commodities, the handling of agricultural or aquacultural commodities in the unprocessed stage, or the processing of agricultural or aquacultural commodities, without respect to the source of employment', includes the retired and the disabled who were domestic farm labor at the time, and fixes the vacant-unit occupancy priority at (f)(3)(C): active farm laborers first, then retired or disabled laborers who were active in the LOCAL farm labor market at the time, then other retired or disabled laborers. 7 CFR 3560.577 tracks that order. Note the regulation adds '(not self-employed)' and the 'consistent with the requirements in 3560.576(b)(2)' cross-reference, neither of which appears in the statute.

This regulation was issued under section 103(b)(4)(A), the PREDECESSOR of section 142(d), and has never been conformed to the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The IRS nonetheless treats paragraph (b) as operative for current bond compliance: the Form 8703 instructions direct filers to 'Regulations sections 1.103-8(b)(1)-(9)' and specifically to 1.103-8(b)(5)(i) and (ii), and Rev. Proc. 2014-50 section 2.02(5) cites 1.103-8(b)(4)(i) for the rule that units cannot be used on a transient basis. Paragraph (b) supplies what the statute does not: (b)(4)(i) the definition of a residential rental project and the excluded facility types, (b)(4)(ii) the multiple-building test that fixes the bond 'project' by proximity, common ownership and a common plan of financing, (b)(5)(i) continuous rental availability for the longer of the bond term or the qualified project period, (b)(5)(ii) the 31-day cap on a temporary vacancy, (b)(6) post-issuance noncompliance being retroactive to the date of issue with an at-least-60-day correction floor, and (b)(8) the definitions of unit and of low or moderate income. TWO PARAGRAPHS ARE STALE AND MUST NOT BE READ AS CURRENT FOR A POST-1986 BOND: (b)(7) states a 10-year / 'qualified number of days' qualified project period where 142(d)(2)(A) states 15 years, and (b)(8)(v) states an 80 percent of median income threshold and a one-exception all-student rule where 142(d)(1) states 50/60 percent and 142(d)(2)(C) imports the five exceptions of 42(i)(3)(D). Both discrepancies are recorded as open questions on the rules concerned rather than reconciled.

Cited for 147(g), the 2 percent cap on issuance costs financed by the issue, which is a permanent condition of a private activity bond's status as a qualified bond and therefore something a buyer of a bond-financed property inherits and cannot cure. 147(g)(2)'s 3.5 percent figure reaches only qualified mortgage and veterans' mortgage bonds of $20,000,000 or less and does not apply to multifamily exempt facility bonds.

Controlling statute for LIHTC. Sets the minimum set-aside, gross rent test, applicable fraction, compliance period, extended use requirements, and the available-unit rule.

Cited for subsection (j), the $100 per failure penalty for not providing the certification required by section 142(d)(7), with a reasonable cause and absence of wilful neglect defence. Subsection (j) carries no inflation adjustment provision in the text as read on 2026-08-30. Section 42(g)(4) makes 6652(j) applicable for section 42 purposes as well.

Iowa adds creed and sexual orientation to the federal classes.

43 pages, 683,967 bytes, sha256 226367c7214a22c84fecaebe8fd9957c4c0ecfee118f892b20db75b3229df7a5. Fetched with plain curl and a standard browser User-Agent; no bot wall. Cited alongside the 9% QAP for one purpose: to establish that the $42-per-unit annual compliance monitoring fee, the $10-per-unit scattered-site surcharge, the December 31 due date and the coverage of both the compliance period and the extended use period are identical on the 4% side, so the fee rule is not a 9%-only rule. No effective-date line; 'published' is the PDF CreationDate (2026-01-26).

55 pages, 795,572 bytes, sha256 4fd8f95334cec828342136132d88c83faf38335c9cf1ed9f3d182130ea706846. Fetched with plain curl and a standard browser User-Agent; no bot wall. Linked from IFA's Housing Tax Credit Resources page. The document carries NO effective-date or Board-adoption line; 'published' is set from the PDF CreationDate (2026-01-26, Adobe InDesign 21.1) and rules sourced to it use effective_from 2026-01-01 on the strength of the QAP's own statement that it 'governs the 2026 and 2027 - 9% Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) allocation years'. The actual adoption date is recorded as an open question on ia.lihtc.compliance_monitoring_fee_42_per_unit_december31. Section 13.1 sets the QAP's own conflict-resolution order: IRC 42 and Treasury regulations first, Iowa Code sections 16.4 and 16.35 and the rules governing the QAP second, the QAP third; it incorporates the IFA Compliance Manual by reference at 13.1.C. Carries the fee schedule (Section 2.2), the affordability scoring categories that generate agency covenants (Section 6.1), post-award change restrictions (Section 8), and the compliance/extended-use definitions (Section 12).

Read in full for this overlay. Provisions used: 187-1 purpose; 187-2 definitions (Affordable Housing, Approving Authority, Developer, Development, Inclusionary Development, Low-/Moderate-/Very-Low-Income Household, Median-Income as Region 1, UHAC); 187-3 the applicability triggers and the two exemptions plus the anti-subdivision clause and the reservation of a higher set-aside; 187-4 the Tier 1 / Tier 2 / state-supported set-asides, the PILOT uplift, the rounding rule and the $180,000-per-unit payment in lieu of a fractional unit in two instalments; 187-5 discretionary incentives and the parking exemption; 187-6 the Tier Map and its five-year re-examination; 187-7 compliance -- the Division of Affordable Housing Checklist before a building permit, the Affordable Housing Agreement before a certificate of occupancy, the 13 percent very-low-income requirement within each bedroom distribution, the ten-or-fewer-units mirror rule, integration and equal amenity access, phasing under N.J.A.C. 5:93-5.6(d); 187-8 the $2,000 administrative fee; 187-9 the 60-day cure and the $2,000-per-day fine; 187-10 to 187-12. THE TIER MAP IS NOT IN THIS SOURCE -- 187-6(A) incorporates a map 'attached hereto' and Municode does not serve it. The map is a raster in the Ord. 21-077 PDF.

Used as the adopting instrument behind the codified Chapter 187 and as the only available carrier of the Tier Map. The map's own legend reads 'Tier 1 - Low, Moderate, & Middle Income Tracts (<120% AMI) Ten Percent (10%) On-Site Set-Aside; Tier 2 - Upper Income Tracts (>=120% AMI) Fifteen Percent (15%) On-Site Set-Aside; N.J.S.E.A. (Not applicable)', is dated 21 October 2021, and its method note states the tiers were built from 2019 ACS 5-year tract median family income against a HUD FY2021 Jersey City FMR-area median family income of $84,700. The recitals record that Ord. 20-089 created Chapter 187 in October 2020 and that portions of it were invalidated by the Superior Court on 12 August 2021 in Fair Share Housing Center v. The City of Jersey City, Docket No. HUD-L-4499-20, which is why the chapter was replaced in its entirety.