Federal Register: June 2, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 105)
DOCID: FR Doc 05-10882
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Veterans Affairs Department
Docket ID: [Docket No. FR-4995-N-01; HUD-2005-0010]
NOTICE: Part II
DOCUMENT ACTION: Notice of proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2006 Fair Market Rents (FMRs).
Proposed Fair Market Rents for Fiscal Year 2006 for Housing Choice Voucher, Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy and Certain Other HUD Programs
DATES: Comments Due Date: August 1, 2005.
Section 8(c)(1) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (USHA) requires the Secretary to publish FMRs periodically, but not less than annually, adjusted to be effective on October 1 of each year. Today's notice proposes FMRs for FY2006. The proposed numbers would amend FMR schedules used to determine payment standard amounts for the Housing Choice Voucher program, to determine initial renewal rents for some expiring projectbased Section 8 contracts, and to determine initial rents for housing assistance payment (HAP) contracts in the Moderate Rehabilitation Single Room Occupancy program. Other programs may require use of FMRs for other purposes.
The proposed FY2006 FMRs in this notice differ from the final FY2005 and previous year FMRs in that they were calculated using the revised Office of Management and Budget (OMB) area definitions that were issued in 2003. For FY2006, HUD is using the countybased statistical areas as defined by OMB, with some modifications. The FMR estimates have been trended to April 2006, the midpoint of FY2006.
Housing and Urban Development Department,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
For technical information on the
methodology used to develop fair market rents or a listing of all fair
market rents, please call the HUD USER information line at 8002452691
or access the information on the HUD Web site at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html. FMRs are listed at the 40th or 50th
percentile in Schedule B. For informational purposes, a table of 40th percentile recent mover rents for the areas with 50th percentile FMRs will be provided on the same Web site noted above. Any questions related to use of FMRs or voucher payment standards should be directed to the respective local HUD program staff. Questions on how to conduct FMR surveys or further methodological explanations may be addressed to Marie L. Lihn or Lynn A. Rodgers, Economic and Market Analysis Division, Office of Economic Affairs, Office of Policy Development and Research, telephone 2027080590. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the tollfree Federal Information Relay Service at 8008778339. (Other than the HUD USER information line and TDD numbers, telephone numbers are not toll free.)
Section 8 of the USHA (42 U.S.C. 1437f) authorizes housing assistance to aid lower income families in renting safe and decent housing. Housing assistance payments are limited by FMRs established by HUD for different areas. In the Housing Choice Voucher program, the FMR is the basis for determining the ``payment standard amount'' used to calculate the maximum monthly subsidy for an assisted family (see 24 CFR 982.503). In general, the FMR for an area is the amount that would be needed to pay the gross rent (shelter rent plus utilities) of privately owned, decent, and safe rental housing of a modest (non luxury) nature with suitable amenities. In addition, all rents subsidized under the Housing Choice Voucher program must meet reasonable rent standards. The interim rule published on October 2, 2000 (65 FR 58870), established 50th percentile FMRs for certain areas.
Electronic Data Availability: This Federal Register notice is
available electronically from the HUD news page: http://www.hudclips.org. Federal Register notices also are available
electronically from the U.S. Government Printing Office Web site at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. II. Procedures for the Development of FMRs
Section 8(c) of the USHA requires the Secretary of HUD to publish FMRs periodically, but not less frequently than annually. Section 8(c) states in part as follows:
Proposed fair market rentals for an area shall be published in the Federal Register with reasonable time for public comment and shall become effective upon the date of publication in final form in the Federal Register. Each fair market rental in effect under this subsection shall be adjusted to be effective on October 1 of each year to reflect changes, based on the most recent available data trended so the rentals will be current for the year to which they apply, of rents for existing or newly constructed rental dwelling units, as the case may be, of various sizes and types in this section.
HUD's regulations at 24 CFR part 888 provide that HUD will develop proposed FMRs, publish them for public comment, provide a public comment period of at least 30 days, analyze the comments, and publish final FMRs. (See 24 CFR 888.115.)
In addition, HUD's regulations at 24 CFR 888.113 set out procedures for HUD to assess whether areas are eligible for FMRs at the 50th percentile and, for areas that were formerly eligible for FMRs at the 50th percentile three years ago, whether these areas continue to remain eligible to use 50th percentile FMRs. The regulations provide that once an area is determined eligible for 50th percentile FMRs, that area is eligible to use 50th percentile FMRs for a period of three years. The threeyear period for the first areas determined eligible to receive the 50th percentile FMRs, following promulgation of the regulation in Sec. 888.113, has come to a close. HUD has commenced the assessment for eligibility and continued eligibility for the 50th percentile FMRs as provided in the regulations. In view, however, of HUD's proposal to apply new metropolitan area definitions for FY2006, this assessment is not yet complete and ready for publication with this notice. HUD will publish a separate notice in approximately six weeks that will identify any areas newly eligible for 50th percentile FMRs and those areas that remain eligible or no longer remain eligible for continued use of 50th percentile FMRs and the applicable proposed FY2006 FMRs for these areas.
III. Metropolitan Area Definitions
The proposed FY2006 FMRs reflect a change in metropolitan area definitions.
HUD is using the countybased statistical areas as defined by OMB, with some modifications. The new definitions have been implemented with modifications intended to minimize changes in FMRs due solely to the use of the new definitions. All proposed metropolitan FMR areas consist of areas within new OMB metropolitan areas. In general, any parts of old metropolitan areas, or formerly nonmetropolitan counties, that would have more than a 5 percent increase or decrease in their FMRs as a result of implementing the new OMB definitions, are defined as separate FMR areas. In general, HUD applies the same update factors (such as random digit dialing (RDD) or consumer price index (CPI) data) to the rents of all FMR areas within the same new metropolitan area.
Despite these efforts, the changes in area definitions have resulted in different proposed FMRs than if an area were subject to the normal updating of last year's FMRs, particularly, for example, in counties that were in old metropolitan areas that are now considered nonmetropolitan under the new OMB definitions. This approach, however, makes HUD FMR area definitions more consistent with those used by most other federal agencies and facilitates use of the extensive new Census data that will become available from the American Community Survey (ACS) and which will replace the decennial census ``long form'' starting in 2010.
In June 2003, OMB issued new metropolitan area definitions based on 2000 Census data and a revised methodology that placed increased weight on commuting patterns. This methodology had been developed and made subject to public comment prior to and after the 2000 Census data collection, and reflected the consensus thinking of numerous experts. HUD economists and demographers were involved in this process and believe that the new definitions are technically superior to the old definitions and better reflect how local housing markets should be evaluated.
OMB metropolitan definitions are important for two reasons. One is that they are the basis on which the federal government collects and reports data (e.g., new Census data collections will base samples and issue reports using the new definitions). For instance, the ACS, which the Census Bureau began administering in full in 2005 to replace decennial census sample data (the current source of Base Rent data), will, starting in 2006 provide extensive and relatively current data on rents and incomes using the new OMB definitions. The other reason OMB definitions are important is that federal agencies are expected to use these definitions in administering their programs unless there is some strong program reason to do otherwise.
HUD proposed using the new OMB definitions in an August 6, 2004 (69 FR 48040), Federal Register publication that issued proposed FY2005 FMRs. That publication introduced use of both the new OMB definitions and 2000 Census data and contained an unusually large number of proposed increases and decreases related to use of the new data and definitions. In response to the limited timeframe available for public comments and the number of comments received opposing use of the new definitions, HUD reverted to using the old definitions in its final FY2005 FMR publication and in the FY2005 income limit publication. HUD subsequently received a number of complaints from members of the public and the Congress related to its failure to implement the new OMB definitions.
For FY2006, HUD is implementing a modified version of the new OMB definitions that further reduces the number and scope of FMR changes that will occur. HUD believes that it is important to implement the new definitions for the following reasons: (1) The new definitions better reflect local housing market relationships; (2) inconsistencies with other federal program standards will be minimized; (3) the new definitions will facilitate the use of the extensive new ACS data that the Census will begin releasing next year that is collected and processed based on the new OMB definitions; and (4) it is responsive to complaints received after issuance of the final FY2005 FMRs from areas regarding HUD's failure to implement the new OMB definitions.
According to OMB guidance on the use of metropolitan area definitions for nonstatistical programs, such as setting FMRs for the Housing Choice Voucher program, HUD may alter OMB definitions of metropolitan areas to better suit program operations. As stated in OMB Bulletin 0403 defining metropolitan areas:
OMB establishes and maintains the definitions of Metropolitan *
* * Statistical Areas * * * solely for statistical purposes. * * *
OMB does not take into account or attempt to anticipate any non
statistical uses that may be made of the definitions[.] In cases
where * * * an agency elects to use the Metropolitan * * * Area
definitions in nonstatistical programs, it is the sponsoring
agency's responsibility to ensure that the definitions are appropriate for such use. An agency using the statistical
definitions in a nonstatistical program may modify the definitions, but only for the purposes of that program. In such cases, any modifications should be clearly identified as deviations from the OMB statistical area definitions in order to avoid confusion with OMB's official definitions of Metropolitan * * * Statistical Areas. B. Modified Implementation of New OMB Definitions
HUD had three objectives in defining FMR areas for FY2006: (1) To
incorporate new OMB metropolitan area definitions so the FMR estimation
system can better use new data collected using those definitions; (2)
to better reflect current housing markets; and (3) to minimize the
number of large changes in FMRs due to use of the new OMB definitions.
The proposed FMR area definitions were developed to achieve these objectives as follows:
Appendix I provides more detailed technical information about data sources and a summary of the impacts of the metropolitan area definitional changes. For nonmetropolitan areas, FMRs continue to be calculated at the county level. The areaspecific data and computations used to calculate proposed FY2006 FMRs and FMR area definitions can be found at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/fmrs/. [[Page 32404]]
C. Future FMR Annual Updates
HUD believes the new OMB definitions of MSAs are reasonable definitions of housing markets and that their relevance will increase with time. That is, while HUD makes distinctions among housing markets within some of these areas based on differences in rents measured in 2000, it believes that the new MSAs better reflect current rental housing markets than the 1990 Censusbased metropolitan area definitions. Therefore, future updates to FMRs will be made at the metropolitan area level and applied to all FMR areas within metropolitan areas where they have been separately designated. HUD funded RDDs will be conducted at the metropolitan area level and compared to the metropolitan area rent estimate to see if adjustments need to be made. If an RDD indicates that a metropolitan area rent needs to be changed, the metropolitan arealevel change factor will be computed and applied to all FMRs within the metropolitan area. HUD will accept information supplied by local housing authorities to make adjustments to FMRs. HUD will rebenchmark all FMR areas when sufficient ACS or other data are available to estimate rents at the same level of accuracy for all FMR areas. To the extent such detailed data are available, the FY2006 separation of FMR subareas within new OMB metropolitan areas will be reexamined to determine if the new survey FMR area base rents are sufficiently different to warrant their continued separation within the metropolitan area.
D. Impacts of FMR Area Changes
The tables in this section present population totals for the parts
of the country affected by various changes in FMRs. Table 1 shows the
effect of the geographic definitional changes on the 2000 Census Base
Rents. Note that 96.9 percent of the population is in areas where the
2000 Census Base Rent changes by less than 5 percent. Larger changes in
base rent are generally limited to places that have been dropped from
major metropolitan areas (these areas now have their own, generally
lower, Base Rents), or small candidate subareas with too little census
rent data to estimate a subarea FMR (these areas are subsumed in
metropolitan areas or FMR areas that have generally much higher 2000
Census Base Rents than the candidate subareas' old FMRarea Base
Rents). A listing of the small candidate subareas is shown in Appendix II.
Table 1.PopulationWeighted Effect of FMR Area Definition Changes on 2000 Census Base Rents Percent of 2000 Census base rent change Number of 2000 population total areas* population 15% or More Decline............................................... 37 1,560,972 0.5 10% to 14.9% Decline.............................................. 23 751,880 0.3 5% to 9.9% Decline................................................ 21 1,798,385 0.6 1% to 4.9% Decline................................................ 346 37,794,535 13.2 Within +/1%...................................................... 3,817 209,401,324 73.1 1% to 4.9% Increase............................................... 357 30,341,010 10.6 5% to 9.9% Increase............................................... 47 3,244,608 1.1 10% to 14.9% Increase............................................. 16 192,499 0.1 15% or More Increase.............................................. 100 1,332,179 0.5
All Areas..................................................... 4,764 286,417,392 100.0 * Areas are counties or countyequivalent areas except in New England where areas are cities and towns.
Table 2 shows population distribution of changes in FMRs that can
be attributed to all differences between the revised final FY2005 FMRs
and proposed FY2006 FMRs including the geographical area changes and
the results of RDDs. Relative to Table 1, there is more dispersion in
the changes, which reflects the overall national trend of a slight
increase in rent on the one hand, and the large number of RDDs
resulting in decreased FMRs on the other. This influence is most
apparent in the much larger percentage of the population that has a 1
percent to 4.9 percent increase in FMRs and the larger percentages with 5 percent to 9.9 percent increases/decreases.
Table 2.Population Distribution by Changes in FMRs: Revised Final FY2005 to Proposed FY2006 Percent of FMR change Number of 2000 population total areas* population 15% or More Decline............................................... 32 1,091,769 0.4 10% to 14.9% Decline.............................................. 29 5,721,614 2.0 5% to 9.9% Decline................................................ 74 16,490,802 5.8 1% to 4.9% Decline................................................ 131 22,005,803 7.7 Within +/1%...................................................... 132 32,600,796 11.4 1% to 4.9% Increase............................................... 3,956 164,012,622 57.3 5% to 9.9% Increase............................................... 238 37,355,878 13.0 10% to 14.9% Increase............................................. 57 4,539,642 1.6 15% or More Increase.............................................. 115 2,598,466 0.9
All Areas..................................................... 4,764 286,417,392 **100.0 * Areas are counties or countyequivalent areas except in New England where areas are cities and towns. ** Individual percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to rounding. [[Page 32405]]
IV. FMR Methodology
As detailed in Appendix I, the proposed FY2006 FMRs use previously accumulated data differently than prior FMR publications. Because the Revised Final FY2005 FMRs are such an important source of accumulated information for the proposed FY2006 FMRs, discussion of the sources and methods used to develop the Revised Final FY2005 FMRs is included here along with the specific discussion of FY2006 FMR data and methods. A. Data Sources: 2000 Census Base Rents
FY2005 FMRs were benchmarked for most areas using 2000 Decennial Census data, which served to correct estimation errors that accumulated since 1994 when FMRs were benchmarked with 1990 Decennial Census data.
At HUD's request, the Census Bureau prepared a special publicly
releasable Census file that permits almost exact replication of HUD's
2000 Base Rent calculations except for areas with few rental units.
This data set is located on HUD's HUD USER Web site at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/CensusRentData/. An areaspecific
explanation of how FY2005 FMRs were benchmarked to the 2000 Census and updated can be found at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/fmrs/.
The proposed FY2006 FMRs are also benchmarked to the 2000 Census. The FY2006 Census Base Rents are computed for the new geography of metropolitan areas, candidate subareas of metropolitan areas (which may become HUD Metro FMR areas), and nonmetropolitan counties using the same computational techniques as the FY2005 benchmarking. The 2000 Census Base Rents for old FMR areas are used, along with the Revised Final FY2005 FMRs, to determine the 2000to2005 portion of the 2000 to2006 update factor for metropolitan areas, new FMR areas, and nonmetropolitan counties. A publicly releasable version of the data used for the FY2006 Census Base Rent determinations will also be available at the above website.
B. FMR Updates: 2000 Census to 2005
For the FY2006 FMR areas (metropolitan areas, HUD Metro FMR areas, and nonmetropolitan counties), update factors from the 2000 Census Base Rent to 2005 are computed using weighted average update factors derived from old FMR area, Revised Final FY2005 FMRs, old FMR area 2000 Census Base Rents and 2000 Census 100 percent population counts as described in Appendix I.
After 2000 Census Base Rent estimates were established for each FMR area and bedroom size, they are updated from the estimated Census date of April 1, 2000, to April 1, 2005 (the midpoint of FY2005). Update factors for the 2000throughendof2003 period were based either on the areaspecific CPI survey data that were available for the largest metropolitan areas or on HUD regional RDD survey data.
FMRs are updated using a combination of data. Annual CPI data are available for most of the largest metropolitan areas. Data from the Census Bureau's American Housing Survey are also available for some of the larger areas. For the 2000to2003 period, HUD conducted regional RDD surveys to obtain rent changes for the metropolitan and nonmetropolitan parts of the 10 HUD regions not covered by area specific CPI surveys. A 3 percent trending factor is used to cover the portions of time for which there are no better data.
For areas with local CPI surveys, CPI annual data on rents and utilities were used to update the Census rent estimates. Threequarters of the 2000 CPI change factor was used to bring the FMR estimates forward from April to December of 2000. Annual CPI survey data could then be used for Calendar Years 2001, 2002, and 2003. Trending to cover the period from December 2003, to April 1, 2005, was then needed. An annual trending factor of 3 percent, based on the average annual increase in the median Census gross rent between 1990 and 2000, was used to update estimates from the end of 2003 (i.e., the last date for which CPI data were available) until the midpoint of the fiscal year in which the estimates were used. The 15month trending factor was 3.75 percent (3 percent times 15/12).
For areas without local CPI surveys, the same process was used except that regional RDD survey data were substituted for CPI data for the period through the end of 2003. Regional RDD surveys were done for 20 areasthe metropolitan and nonmetropolitan part of each of the 10 HUD regions. Areas covered by CPI metropolitan surveys were excluded from the RDD metropolitan regional surveys.
HUD also conducted RDD telephone FMR surveys for selected areas and incorporated these into FMR update factors.
C. Updates From 2005 to Proposed FY2006
After using the old FMR area data as described above to update metropolitan area, new FMR area, and nonmetropolitan county rents to 2005, metropolitan area and nonmetropolitan county update factors from 2005 to 2006 are applied to derive the proposed FY2006 FMRs. All new FMR areas that are part of a new metropolitan area are updated with the same metropolitan arealevel 2005to2006 update factor.
Specifically, local CPI data is used to move rents from the end of 2003 to the end of 2004 and the same 15month trending factor is then applied. Regional RDDs, however, were not conducted in 2004 in anticipation of the arrival of ACS data. Therefore, for proposed FY2006 FMRs, Census regionlevel CPI data for Class B and Csize cities is being used to update areas without local CPI update factors. Data from the 2004 ACS will be used to replace regional CPI data if it becomes available in time for inclusion in the final FY2006 publication. Once fullscale ACS data collections start to become available in the latter part of 2006, sample sizes will be large enough to estimate FMRs for the larger metropolitan areas on an annual basis and for other areas on a two to fouryear basis.
D. Additional RDD Surveys and Other Data
RDDs covering 35 additional areas were conducted by HUD in the JanuaryFebruary period of 2005 and completed in time for use in this publication. In addition, PHA surveys were conducted for 5 area RDDs. Table 3 shows the results of the HUD and PHA surveys. The first column of Table 3 identifies the RDD survey area. Except where noted, RDD survey areas correspond to metropolitan areas as defined by OMB. In metropolitan areas where HUD defines HUD Metro FMR Areas (HMFAs), the percent change due to the RDD reported in the last column is applied to the unrevised FY2006 FMR of each HMFA in the metropolitan area. A change in FMR estimates is shown only if the RDD result shows a statistically significant difference from the FMR estimate based on nonRDD update factors. The ``Result of RDD'' column shows whether or not the RDD results were statistically different enough to justify replacing the unrevised estimates with the RDD results.
The RDD results show an unusually high percentage of FMR decreases.
These decreases are consistent with multifamily apartment complex time
series data that also indicated decreases and were available for
comparison for all of the larger metropolitan areas surveyed.
Nationally, Census vacancy data continue to show rental vacancy rates
at record highs, which, combined with loss of higher income renters to [[Page 32406]]
homeownership, have adverse impacts on rents. The survey results were as follows:
BILLING CODE 421001P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN05.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN05.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN05.006
BILLING CODE 421001C
E. Large Bedroom Rents
FMR estimates are calculated for twobedroom units. This is the most common size of rental units, and, therefore, the most reliable to survey and analyze. After each Decennial Census, rent relationships between twobedroom units and other unit sizes are calculated and used to set FMRs for other units. This is done because it is much easier to update twobedroom estimates and to use preestablished cost relationships with other bedroom sizes than it is to develop independent FMR estimates for each bedroom size, which was last done using 2000 Census data. A publicly releasable version of the data file that permits derivations of rent ratios is available at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr/CensusRentData/ .
The rents for threebedroom and larger units continue to reflect HUD's policy to set higher rents for these units than would result from using normal market rents. This adjustment is intended to increase the likelihood that the largest families, which have the most difficulty in leasing units, will be successful in finding eligible program units. The adjustment adds bonuses of 8.7 percent to the unadjusted three bedroom FMR estimates and adds 7.7 percent to the unadjusted four bedroom FMR estimates. The FMRs for unit sizes larger than four bedrooms are calculated by adding 15 percent to the fourbedroom FMR for each extra bedroom. For example, the FMR for a fivebedroom unit is 1.15 times the fourbedroom FMR, and the FMR for a sixbedroom unit is 1.30 times the fourbedroom FMR. FMRs for singleroom occupancy units are 0.75 times the zerobedroom (efficiency) FMR.
A further adjustment was made using 2000 Census data in
establishing rent ratios for areas with local bedroomsize intervals
above or below what are considered to be reasonable ranges or where
sample sizes are inadequate to accurately measure bedroom rent
differentials. Experience has shown that highly unusual bedroom ratios
typically reflect inadequate sample sizes or peculiar local
circumstances that HUD would not want to utilize in setting FMRs (e.g.,
luxury efficiency apartments in New York City that rent for more than
typical onebedroom units). Bedroom interval ranges were established
based on an analysis of the range of such intervals for all areas with large enough
samples to permit accurate bedroom ratio determinations. The following ranges were used: efficiency units were between 0.65 and 0.83 of the twobedroom FMR, onebedroom units were between 0.76 and 0.90 of the twobedroom unit, threebedroom units were between 1.10 and 1.34 of the twobedroom unit, and fourbedroom units were between 1.14 and 1.63 of the twobedroom unit. Bedroom rents for a given FMR area were then adjusted if the differentials between bedroomsize FMRs were inconsistent with normally observed patterns (e.g., efficiency rents were not allowed to be higher than onebedroom rents and fourbedroom rents were set at a minimum of 3 percent higher than threebedroom rents).
For lowpopulation, nonmetropolitan counties with small Census
recentmover rent samples, Censusdefined county group data were used
in determining rents for each bedroom size. This adjustment was made to
protect against unrealistically high or low FMRs due to insufficient
sample sizes. The areas covered by this new estimation method had less than the HUD standard of 200 twobedroom, Censustabulated
V. Manufactured Home Space Surveys
The FMR used to establish payment standard amounts for the rental of manufactured home spaces in the Housing Choice Voucher program is 40 percent of the FMR for a twobedroom unit. HUD will consider modification of the manufactured home space FMRs where public comments present statistically valid survey data showing the 40th percentile manufactured home space rent (including the cost of utilities) for the entire FMR area.
All approved exceptions to these rents that were in effect in FY2005 were updated to FY2006 using the same data used to estimate the Housing Choice Voucher program FMRs if the respective FMR area's definition had remained the same. If the result of this computation was higher than 40 percent of the rebenchmarked twobedroom rent, the exception remained and is listed in Schedule D. The FMR area definitions used for the rental of manufactured home spaces are the same as the area definitions used for the other FMRs. Areas with definitional changes that previously had exception, manufactured housing space rental FMRs have been requested to submit new surveys to justify higher than standard space rental FMRs if they believe higher space rental allowances are needed.
VI. Request for Public Comments
HUD seeks public comments on FMR levels for specific areas. Comments on FMR levels must include sufficient information (including local data and a full description of the rental housing survey methodology used) to justify any proposed changes. Changes may be proposed in all or any one or more of the unitsize categories on the schedule. Recommendations and supporting data must reflect the rent levels that exist within the entire FMR area.
For the supporting data, HUD recommends the use of professionally conducted RDD telephone surveys to test the accuracy of FMRs for areas where there is a sufficient number of Section 8 units to justify the survey cost of approximately $20,000 to $30,000. Areas with 500 or more program units usually meet this cost criterion, and areas with fewer units may meet it if actual rents for twobedroom units are significantly different from the FMRs proposed by HUD. In addition, HUD has developed a version of the RDD survey methodology for smaller, nonmetropolitan public housing agencies (PHAs). This methodology is designed to be simple enough to be done by the PHA itself, rather than by professional survey organizations, at a cost of $5,000 or less.
PHAs in nonmetropolitan areas may, under certain circumstances, conduct surveys of groups of counties. HUD must approve all county grouped surveys in advance. PHAs are cautioned that the resulting FMRs will not be identical for the counties surveyed; each individual FMR area will have a separate FMR based on the relationship of rents in that area to the combined rents in the cluster of FMR areas. In addition, PHAs are advised that counties whose FMRs are based on the combined rents in the cluster of FMR areas will not have their FMRs revised unless the grouped survey results show a revised FMR above the combined rent level.
PHAs that plan to use the RDD survey technique should obtain a copy of the appropriate survey guide. Larger PHAs should request HUD's survey guide entitled, ``Random Digit Dialing Surveys; A Guide to Assist Larger Public Housing Agencies in Preparing Fair Market Rent Comments.'' Smaller PHAs should obtain the guide entitled, ``Rental Housing Surveys; A Guide to Assist Smaller Public Housing Agencies in Preparing Fair Market Rent Comments.'' These guides are available from HUD USER on 8002452691, or from HUD's Web site, in Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat format, at http://www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html.
In providing data to support comments, other survey methodologies are acceptable if the survey methodology can provide statistically reliable, unbiased estimates of the gross rent. Survey samples should preferably be randomly drawn from a complete list of rental units for the FMR area. If this is not feasible, the selected sample must be drawn to be statistically representative of the entire rental housing stock of the FMR area. Surveys must include units at all rent levels and be representative by structure type (including singlefamily, duplex, and other small rental properties), age of housing unit, and geographic location. The Decennial Census should be used as a means of verifying if a sample is representative of the FMR area's rental housing stock.
Most surveys cover only one and twobedroom units, which has statistical advantages. If the survey is statistically acceptable, HUD will estimate FMRs for other bedroom sizes using ratios based on the Decennial Census. A PHA or contractor that cannot obtain the recommended number of sample responses after reasonable efforts should consult with HUD before abandoning its survey; in such situations HUD is prepared to relax normal sample size requirements.
HUD will consider increasing manufactured home space FMRs where public comment demonstrates that 40 percent of the twobedroom FMR is not adequate. In order to be accepted as a basis for revising the manufactured home space FMRs, comments must include a pad rental survey of the mobile home parks in the area, identify the utilities included in each park's rental fee, and provide a copy of the applicable PHA's utility schedule.
Accordingly, the Fair Market Rent Schedules, which will not be
codified in 24 CFR Part 888, are proposed to be amended as shown in the Appendix to this notice:
Dated: May 26. 2005.
Roy A. Bernardi,
Fair Market Rents for the Housing Choice Voucher Program
Schedules B and DGeneral Explanatory Notes
1. Geographic Coverage
a. Metropolitan AreasFMRs are marketwide rent estimates that are
intended to provide housing opportunities throughout the geographic area in which rentalhousing units are
in direct competition. The proposed FY2006 FMRs reflect a change in metropolitan area definitions. HUD is using the metropolitan CoreBased Statistical Areas (CBSA), which are made up of one or more counties, as defined by OMB, with some modifications. HUD is generally assigning separate FMRs to the component counties of CBSA Micropolitan Areas.
b. Modifications to OMB DefinitionsFollowing OMB guidance, the estimation procedure for the FY2006 proposed FMRs incorporates the 2003 OMB definitions of metropolitan areas based on the new CBSA standards as implemented with 2000 Census data, but makes adjustments to the definitions to separate subparts of these areas where FMRs would otherwise change significantly if the new area definitions were used without modification. In CBSAs where subareas are established, it is HUD's view that the geographic extent of the housing markets are not yet the same as the geographic extent of the CBSAs, but may become so as the social and economic integration of the CBSA component areas increases. Modifications to metropolitan CBSA definitions are made according to a formula as described below.
Metropolitan Areas CBSAs (referred to as Metropolitan Statistical Areas or MSAs) may be modified to allow for subarea FMRs within MSAs based on the boundaries of old FMR areas (OFAs) within the boundaries of new MSAs. (OFAs are the FMR areas defined for the FY2005 FMRs)). Collectively, they include old definition MSAs/PMSAs, metropolitan counties deleted from old definition MSAs/PMSAs by HUD for FMR purposes, and counties and county parts outside of old definition MSAs/ PMSAs referred to as nonmetropolitan counties. Subareas of MSAs are assigned their own FMRs when the subarea 2000 Census Base Rent differs by at least 5 percent from (i.e., is at most 95 percent or at least 105 percent of) the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent. MSA subareas, and the remaining portions of MSAs after subareas have been determined, are referred to as HMFAs to distinguish these areas from OMB's official definition of MSAs.
The specific counties (or New England towns and cities) within each state in MSAs and HMFAs are listed in the FMR tables.
2. Bedroom Size Adjustments
Schedule B shows the FMRs for 0bedroom through 4bedroom units. The FMRs for unit sizes larger than 4 bedrooms are calculated by adding 15 percent to the 4bedroom FMR for each extra bedroom. For example, the FMR for a 5bedroom unit is 1.15 times the 4bedroom FMR, and the FMR for a 6bedroom unit is 1.30 times the 4bedroom FMR. FMRs for single room occupancy (SRO) units are 0.75 times the 0bedroom FMR. 3. Arrangement of FMR Areas and Identification of Constituent Parts
a. The FMR areas in Schedule B are listed alphabetically by metropolitan FMR area and by nonmetropolitan county within each state. The exception FMRs for manufactured home spaces in Schedule D are listed alphabetically by state.
b. The constituent counties (or New England towns and cities) included in each metropolitan FMR area are listed immediately following the listings of the FMR dollar amounts. All constituent parts of a metropolitan FMR area that are in more than one state can be identified by consulting the listings for each applicable state.
c. Two nonmetropolitan counties are listed alphabetically on each line of the nonmetropolitan county listings.
d. The New England towns and cities included in a nonmetropolitan part of a county are listed immediately following the county name. Appendix IDetailed Explanation of How New FMR Areas Determined A. Use and Modification of New OMB Metropolitan Area Definitions
Following OMB guidance, the estimation procedure for the FY2006 proposed FMRs incorporates the 2003 OMB definitions of metropolitan areas based on the new CoreBased Statistical Area (CBSA) standards as implemented with 2000 Census data, but makes adjustments to the definitions to separate subparts of these areas where FMRs would otherwise change significantly if the new area definitions were used without modification. In CBSAs where subareas are established, it is HUD's view that the geographic extent of the housing markets are not yet the same as the geographic extent of the CBSAs, but may become so as the social and economic integration of the CBSA component areas increases.
The geographic baseline for the new estimation procedure is the CBSA Metropolitan Areas (referred to as Metropolitan Statistical Areas or MSAs) and CBSA Nonmetropolitan Counties (nonmetropolitan counties include the county components of Micropolitan CBSAs where the counties are generally assigned separate FMRs). The proposed HUDmodified CBSA definitions allow for subarea FMRs within MSAs based on the boundaries of ``Old FMR Areas'' (OFAs) within the boundaries of new MSAs. (OFAs are the FMR areas defined for the FY2005 FMRs). Collectively, they include June 30, 1999, OMB definition Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Primary Metropolitan Statistical Areas (old definition MSAs/PMSAs), metropolitan counties deleted from old definition MSAs/PMSAs by HUD for FMR purposes, and counties and county parts outside of old definition MSAs/PMSAs referred to as nonmetropolitan counties. Subareas of MSAs are assigned their own FMRs when the subarea 2000 Census Base Rent differs significantly from the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent. MSA sub areas, and the remaining portions of MSAs after subareas have been determined, are referred to as ``HUD Metro FMR Areas (HMFAs)'' to distinguish these areas from OMB's official definition of MSAs. The proposed FY2006 FMRs are calculated using a threestep process designed to: (1) Identify MSAs that should be broken up into HMFAs because of quantified differences in OFA and CBSA rents; (2) capture information used to set the FY2005 Revised Final FMRs; and (3) update the FMRs to FY2006 and move the FMR estimation process toward a CBSAbased geography.
1. Step 1, Identifying Housing Markets
To identify MSAs that should be broken up into HMFAs because rentalhousing markets are not yet well integrated, HUD compares 2000 Census Base Rents for the MSAs to 2000 Census Base Rent for the parts of each MSA that were in different OFAs and, therefore, had different FY2005 Revised Final FMRs. The parts of each MSA that were in different OFAs are referred to here as ``candidate subareas.'' If the 2000 Census Base Rent of a candidate subarea differs from the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent by at least 5 percent (i.e., is at 95 percent or less or 105 percent or more) of the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent, then the candidate subarea is designated as an HMFA and is assigned its own 2000 Census Base Rent to be updated, as described below, to derive the proposed FY2006 FMR. HUD identifies the HMFA with a name based on its geography and ending with ``HUD Metro FMR Area'' to distinguish it from the parent MSA.
The remaining candidate subareas within an MSA, having candidate subarea 2000 Census Base Rents that differ from the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent by less than 5 percent (i.e., are 95 percent or more and 105 percent or less of the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent), are combined to form an HMFA and are assigned the MSA 2000 Base Rent which is updated, as described below, to derive the proposed FY2006 FMR. HUD identifies the HMFA with a name based on its geography and ending with ``HUD Metro FMR Area'' to distinguish it from the parent MSA.
MSAs with no candidate subareas, or where all candidate sub areas have 2000 Census Base Rents within 5 percent of the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent, are assigned the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent, which is updated, as described below, to derive the proposed FY2006 FMR. Since these areas do not vary from OMB's official metropolitan area definitions, HUD identifies them with their official MSA names as determined by OMB.
Generally, 2000 Census Base Rents for MSAs, HMFAs, and
nonmetropolitan counties are set at the 40th percentile rent of recent movers in standard quality two
bedroom units. Base Rents are set at the 50th percentile recent mover rent if at least 75 percent of the population of the MSA, HMFA, or nonmetropolitan county was in an OFA with a 50th percentile FMR. In all cases except the BergenPassaic, NJ HMFA, the 40th percentile 2000 Census Base Rents are used to evaluate whether HMFAs are created from MSAs. The BergenPassaic, NJ HMFA was unique among the former FY2005 FMR areas with 50th percentile FMRs in that if the 50th percentile rent had not been used as its 2000 Census Base Rent for establishing the HMFA, the BergenPassaic, NJ HMFA would have been made part of a larger HMFA with no mechanism within the formula established in this notice to continue its 50th percentile FMR.
The 2000 Census data for any candidate subarea must be
sufficient to estimate a reliable FMR. HUD's standard is that at
least 200 Censustabulated cases are needed for a reliable 2000
Census Base Rent estimate. Candidate subareas with insufficient
samples are combined with adjacent candidate subareas and 2000
Census Base Rents (as well as 2000to2005 update factors as
described below) are computed for the combined areas. (See Table 3
for a list of counties and New England towns combined with different candidate subareas because of insufficient sample size).
Nonmetropolitan counties must also meet the 200case standard to get their own 2000 Census Base Rent. Nonmetropolitan counties with fewer than 200 cases are assigned the 2000 Census Base Rent of contiguous county groups designated by the Census Bureau for purposes of releasing data under the Public Use Microdata Sample program.
In New England, some towns that formerly were part of a metropolitan OFA are now in nonmetropolitan counties under the new OMB metropolitan area definitions. Because these towns were outlying parts of old metropolitan areas and were determined to have limited interaction with the old metropolitan areas, HUD did not include formerly metropolitan parts of now nonmetropolitan counties in developing HMFAs, but instead followed OMB's countybased area designations.
2. Step 2, Capturing 2000 to 2005 Update Information
MSA, HMFA, and nonmetropolitan county FMRs are updated from the 2000 Census Base Rents to 2005 using a populationweighted average aggregate update factor (WAUF). Within each component of a MSA, HMFA, or nonmetropolitan county having a different FY2005 Revised Final FMR (i.e., within a different OFA), the aggregate 2000to2005 OFA update factor is computed by dividing the FY2005 Revised Final FMR by the 2000 Census Base Rent for the OFA. The WAUF is computed by multiplying each component OFA update factor by the part of the population of the MSA, HMFA, or nonmetropolitan county in each of the OFAs, summing these products, and dividing by the total population of the MSA, HMFA, or nonmetropolitan county. The WAUF is then applied to the 2000 Census Base Rent for the MSA, HMFA, or nonmetropolitan county to determine the 2005 Rent.
3. Step 3, Updating From 2005 to 2006 on an MSA Basis
For each MSA and nonmetropolitan county, a 2005to2006 update factor is computed based on available information, such as local or regional CPI data, or the results of a local RDD survey. Most of the HMFA FMRs in an MSA are updated from 2005 to 2006 using MSAwide update factors. Exceptions to this practice are areas where HUD conducted RDDs at the HMFA level, and where there are variations among HMFAs with local CPI update factors in the utilitiestogross rent ratio. Numerical examples of this approach are provided in the following sections.
B. Numerical Examples of Proposed FY2006 FMR Computations
FMRs are estimated for all MSAs as follows: the 40th percentile rent for renters who recently moved into twobedroom standard quality units is estimated for each MSA using the 2000 Census. This is the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent. The MSA 2000 Census Base Rent is updated through 2005 by applying the populationweighted average of the update factors used to produce the Revised Final FY2005 FMRs for OFAs (or OFA parts) within the MSA. Multiplying the MSA 2000 Census Base rent by the blended 2005 update factor, and that result (the 2005 intermediate rent) by an MSAbased 2005to2006 update factor, produces the proposed FY2006 FMR.
For areas without RDDs, the FY2006 FMRs equal the Base 2000 FMR times the 2000to2005 update factor times the most recent year's local or regional CPI change. (Strictly speaking, a year of trending is removed, the most recent annual rent change factor is used as a replacement, and another year of trending is then added.) For areas with MSA RDDs, the same process is used, but the 2005to2006 update factor is based on the RDD change. For instance, a forwardtrended April 2005 RDD result for an MSA would be compared with the FY2006 evaluated rent calculated from the 2000 Census Base MSA Rent, the MSA 2000to2005 update factor, and the MSA 2005to2006 update factor. If the MSA 2006 evaluated rent is outside the 90 percent confidence interval of the RDD, then the MSA 2005to2006 update factor is set at the ratio of the RDD result to the 2005 MSA intermediate rent. This ratio is used as the 2005to2006 update factor for all HMFAs within the MSA in the event that the MSA has been split into more than one HMFA.
The following paragraphs provide examples of different ways the proposed FY2006 FMRs are computed based on the differences in geography and 2000 Census Base Rents between the Revised Final FY2005 FMRs and the proposed FY2006 FMRs.
1. No Geographic Change
The A MSA has the same geographic definition as OFA A. In this
case, the proposed FY2006 FMR is simply an update of the OFA A
Revised Final FY2005 FMR. That is because the 2000 Census Base Rent
for the A MSA is identical to that of OFA A, and there is no need to
compute a weighted average 2000to2005 update factor because there is only one OFA in the A MSA. This same logic applies to
nonmetropolitan counties, and to any new MSA that consists of a part of a single OFA.
2. Candidate SubAreas in an MSA With Similar 2000 Census Base Rents
HUD examined MSA subareas in establishing proposed FY2006 FMR areas. Candidate subareas considered for calculation of separate FMRs were generally determined from the way MSAs are divided by OFAs. Any candidate subarea with a 2000 Census Base Rent that differs from the MSA Census Base Rent by 5 percent or more is designated an HMFA and receives a separate proposed FY2006 FMR based on its own 2000 Census Base Rent and OFA 2000to2005 update factor. Remaining candidate subareas with 2000 Census Base Rents that differ from their MSA Census Base Rent by less than 5 percent are combined into HMFAs, receive the MSA Base Rent, and are updated to 2005 using a populationweighted average of their component OFA 2000to2005 update factors. All HMFAs are updated from 2005to2006 using the same MSAwide update factor.
The DE MSA is made up of OFA D and part of OFA E. These two
areas are candidate subareas of the DE MSA. Suppose they had the following characteristics:
2000to 2000 2005 FMR Area 2000 census base update population rent factor from OFA FMRs Candidate Subarea D............. 700,000 $700 1.250 Candidate Subarea E............. 300,000 740 1.210 DE MSA Total.................... 1,000,000 710 1.238
The 2000 Census Base Rents of the candidate subareas D and E do
not differ from the DE MSA 2000 Census Base Rent by more than 5 percent, and is calculated as follows:
($710$700)/$710 = $10/$710 = 1.4% < 5%, and
($740$710)/$710 = $30/$710 = 4.2% < 5%.
Therefore, HUD does not establish subareas within the DE MSA; the DE MSA is a single proposed FY2006 FMR area.
The update factor for the DE MSA through 2005 is: (1.250 x 700,000 + 1.210 x 300,000)/1,000,000
= (875,000 + 363,000)/1,000,000
= (1,238,000)/1,000,000 = 1.238
The 2005 intermediate rent estimate for the DE MSA is $710 x
1.238 = $879. The 2005to2006 regional update factor for DE MSA is 1.03 for a proposed FY2006 FMR of:
$710 x 1.238 x 1.03
= $879 x 1.03 = $905.
3. Candidate Subareas in an MSA With Dissimilar 2000 Census Base Rents
Next, consider the XYZ MSA made up of three candidate sub areas with the following characteristics:
2000to 2005 FMR Area 2000 2000 census update population base rent factor from OFA FMRs Candidate Subarea X............. 500,000 $700 1.280 Candidate Subarea Y............. 300,000 715 1.230 Candidate Subarea Z............. 200,000 625 1.200 XYZ MSA Total.................. 1,000,000 690 1.249
Suppose further that the regionally estimated 2005to2006
update factor for the XYZ MSA is 1.03. First, the 2000 Census Base
Rents for candidate subareas X and Y differ from the MSA 2000 Census Base Rent by less than 5 percent:
($700$690)/$690 = $10/ $690 = 1.45 % < 5%, and
($715$690)/$690 = $25/$690 = 3.62 % < 5%.
Therefore, these two areas are assigned the MSA 2000 Census Base
Rent and form the XY HUD Metro FMR Area. Their combined 2000to
2005 update factor is derived from the 2000 CensustoRevised Final FY2005 FMR update factors for their OFAs:
(1.28 x 500,000 + 1.23 x 300,000)/800,000
= (640,000 + 369,000)/800,000
= 1,009,000/800,000 = 1.2613.
The proposed FY2006 FMR for the XY HUD Metro FMR Area is therefore:
$690 x 1.2613 x 1.03
= $870 x 1.03 = $896.
In candidate subarea Z, the 2000 Census Base Rent differs from
the XYZ MSA 2000 Census Base Rent by more than 5 percent [($690
$625)/$690 = $65/$690 = 9.42% > 5%], so it is designated the Z HUD
Metro FMR Area. Because of its difference from the XYZ MSA 2000
Census Base Rent, the proposed FY2006 FMR for the Z HUD Metro FMR
Area is estimated using that area's own 2000 Census Base Rent, a
2000to2005 FMR update factor derived from its OFA 2000 Census Base
Rent to Revised Final FY2005 FMR update factor, and the XYZ MSA
2005to2006 update factor. The proposed FY2006 FMR for the Z HUD Metro FMR Area is:
$625.00 x 1.20 x 1.03
= $750 x 1.03 = $773.
4. Application of an MSA RDD in an MSA With HMFAs
Finally, suppose that an RDD survey was performed in XYZ MSA.
The results of the MSA RDD survey are compared to a 2006 evaluated
rent for the MSA. The 2006 XYZ MSA evaluated rent is computed from
the XYZ MSA 2000 Census Base Rent, the combined 2000to2005
update factor for all of the candidate subareas, and the regionally
estimated 2005to2006 update factor for the XYZ MSA as follows:
$690 x [(1.28 x 500,000 + 1.23 x 300,000 + 1.20 x 200,000)/ 1,000,000] x 1.03
= $690 x [(640,000 + 369,000 + 240,000)/1,000,000] x 1.03
= $690 x [1,249,000/1,000,000] x 1.03
= $690 x1.249 x 1.03
= $862 x 1.03 = $888
The RDD finds, however, that the proposed FY2006 FMR for the X YZ MSA should be $800. So, the actual RDDbased 2005to2006 update factor for the XYZ MSA is set at the ratio of the RDD result to the MSA 2005 intermediate rent:
$800/$862 = 0.9281.
The FMRs for the XY HUD Metro FMR Area and the Z HUD Metro FMR
Area are computed by applying the MSA RDDbased 2005to2006 update
factor (0.9281) to the two HMFAs' 2005 intermediate rents.
Therefore, the proposed FY2006 FMR for the XY HUD Metro FMR Area is:
$690 x 1.2613 x 0.9281
= $870 x 0.9281 = $808,
and the proposed FY2006 FMR for the Z HUD Metro FMR Area is: $625.00 x 1.20 x 0.9281
= $750 x 0.9281 = $696.
Appendix II.Candidate MSA SubAreas With Insufficient FMR Sample Assigned to Adjacent Areas County or New England New MSA or HUD Metro FMR State city or town Old FMR area (OFA) area assigned to Alabama........................... Bibb County............ Bibb County........... BirminghamHoover, AL MSA. Geneva County.......... Geneva County......... Dothan, AL MSA. Greene County.......... Greene County......... Tuscaloosa, AL MSA. Hale County............ Hale County........... Tuscaloosa, AL MSA. Lowndes County......... Lowndes County........ Montgomery, AL MSA. Arkansas.......................... Cleveland County....... Cleveland County...... Pine Bluff, AR MSA. Lincoln County......... Lincoln County........ Pine Bluff, AR MSA. Madison County......... Madison County........ FayettevilleSpringdale Rogers, ARMO MSA. Perry County........... Perry County.......... Little RockNorth Little Rock, AR MSA. Colorado.......................... Clear Creek County..... Clear Creek County.... DenverAurora, CO MSA. Elbert County.......... Elbert County......... DenverAurora, CO MSA. Gilpin County.......... Gilpin County......... DenverAurora, CO MSA. Connecticut....................... Hartland town.......... Hartford County....... HartfordWest HartfordEast Hartford, CT MSA. Chester town........... Middlesex County...... HartfordWest HartfordEast Hartford, CT MSA. Clinton town........... New HavenMeriden, CT. Southern Middlesex County, CT HUD Metro FMR Area. Deep River town........ Middlesex County...... Southern Middlesex County, CT HUD Metro FMR Area. Essex town............. Middlesex County...... Southern Middlesex County, CT HUD Metro FMR Area. Killingworth town...... New HavenMeriden, CT. Southern Middlesex County, CT HUD Metro FMR Area. Old Saybrook town...... New LondonNorwich, CT Southern Middlesex County, RI. CT HUD Metro FMR Area. Westbrook town......... Middlesex County...... Southern Middlesex County, CT HUD Metro FMR Area. Lyme town.............. New London County..... NorwichNew London, CT MSA. [[Page 32413]]
Voluntown town......... New London County..... NorwichNew London, CT MSA. Union town............. Tolland County........ HartfordWest HartfordEast Hartford, CT MSA. Florida........................... Gilchrist County....... Gilchrist County...... Gainesville, FL MSA. Jefferson County....... Jefferson County...... Tallahassee, FL MSA. Georgia........................... Baker County........... Baker County.......... Albany, GA MSA. Brantley County........ Brantley County....... Brunswick, GA MSA. Brooks County.......... Brooks County......... Valdosta, GA MSA. Burke County........... Burke County.......... AugustaRichmond County, GA SC MSA. Crawford County........ Crawford County....... Macon, GA MSA. Dawson County.......... Dawson County......... AtlantaSandy Springs Marietta, GA MSA. Echols County.......... Echols County......... Valdosta, GA MSA. Heard County........... Heard County.......... AtlantaSandy Springs Marietta, GA MSA. Jasper County.......... Jasper County......... AtlantaSandy Springs Marietta, GA MSA. Lanier County.......... Lanier County......... Valdosta, GA MSA. McIntosh County........ McIntosh County....... Brunswick, GA MSA. Marion County.......... Marion County......... Columbus, GAAL MSA. Oglethorpe County...... Oglethorpe County..... AthensClarke County, GA MSA. Pike County............ Pike County........... AtlantaSandy Springs Marietta, GA MSA. Terrell County......... Terrell County........ Albany, GA MSA. Worth County........... Worth County.......... Albany, GA MSA. Idaho............................. Boise County........... Boise County.......... Boise CityNampa, ID MSA. Franklin County........ Franklin County....... Logan, UTID MSA. Jefferson County....... Jefferson County...... Idaho Falls, ID MSA. Owyhee County.......... Owyhee County......... Boise CityNampa, ID MSA. Power County........... Power County.......... Pocatello, ID MSA. Illinois.......................... Calhoun County......... Calhoun County........ St. Louis, MOIL MSA. Ford County............ Ford County........... ChampaignUrbana, IL MSA. Marshall County........ Marshall County....... Peoria, IL MSA. Mercer County.......... Mercer County......... DavenportMolineRock Island, IAIL MSA. Piatt County........... Piatt County.......... ChampaignUrbana, IL MSA. Stark County........... Stark County.......... Peoria, IL MSA. Indiana........................... Benton County.......... Benton County......... Lafayette, IN MSA. Brown County........... Brown County.......... Indianapolis, IN MSA. Franklin County........ Franklin County....... CincinnatiMiddletown, OH KYIN MSA.