What Happened to Asheville Housing
The agency that houses thousands of the city's lowest-income families is cutting roughly half its staff. It got here through a storm, a financial fall, and three leaders in a single year. Here is the before and after, and what it means for the people inside.
The Housing Authority of the City of Asheville is not a charity and not a landlord in the usual sense. It is the public backstop. It runs the apartments and the rent vouchers that stand between a few thousand of the city's poorest households and the street. When it shrinks, the safety net shrinks with it.
In the spring and summer of 2026, the authority announced two rounds of cuts. The first removed about a fifth of its staff. The second laid out a plan to take the workforce down to fewer than fifty full-time positions, less than half of what it had been. Both followed a financial collapse that the agency traces, in part, to Hurricane Helene.
The cuts are the headline. The story is how a public safety net spent down its cushion and then had to cut into bone.
Before the cuts mean anything, it helps to see the size of what they cut into.
The authority owns and manages roughly fifteen hundred apartments across the city, and it administers about 1,300 more rent vouchers on top of that, the kind that help a family afford a privately owned unit. All told it touches the housing of close to three thousand low-income households, most of them earning far below the area's median. Nearly all of its old public housing moved to a voucher-backed model in 2016, under a federal program meant to bring private money in for repairs, and none of it is public housing today.
That is the thing being reorganized. Not an office. The roof over a few thousand of the lowest-income people in Asheville.
Read each line as a before and after. Each line is sourced and dated in the notes; this is the shape of the change, not a single snapshot.
The staff figure counts positions going into the April 2026 cuts, part-time afterschool staff included; the end-of-2027 target counts full-time positions only. The two baselines the agency has used for its own headcount do not fully line up, so treat the exact trajectory as approximate; the direction is not in doubt.
Helene hit on September 27, 2024. The damage was bad. What it set off inside the authority was worse for the institution.
By the authority's own account to federal regulators, its properties lost water, power, internet, and phone service. Electricity did not come back for most residents and staff until October 6, more than a week later. Staff were hit alongside the residents, some living through flooded roads and no power of their own. The agency held off all evictions through February 1, 2025 and asked Washington for a stack of regulatory waivers to get through the recovery.
Then came the fight that, by her account, cost the chief executive her job. According to a lawsuit she later filed, then-CEO Monique Pierre clashed with a board member, who was himself a resident of an authority property, over whether to forgive residents' rent after the storm. Pierre alleges she told him federal law did not let her waive rent on her own. Weeks later, on November 7, 2024, the board fired her in a closed session, citing a memo she had sent staff. The mayor said at the time that the board chair had given her no basis for the firing.
What followed was a year of churn at the top. An interim director ran the agency for roughly twelve months. In February 2025, about three months into that stretch, the city council eliminated two board seats, removing the chair and the vice chair. Ella Santos joined as chief operating officer in June 2025, and the reconstituted board chose her as president and CEO that September. She started in November 2025, the third leader the authority had had in a year, and she was the one who announced the cuts.
Pierre's account is an allegation in a lawsuit, and the case is unresolved.
She is suing the authority for wrongful termination, framing it as a breach of her contract. The authority says it does not comment on pending litigation, and the board's stated reason for the firing was the staff memo, not the rent dispute. We lay out her claims because they are part of the public record of how the agency reached this point, not because a court has ruled on them. It has not.
A housing authority needs money in reserve. The authority's chief operating officer told a local station that without three months of operating expenses in reserve, HUD considers an authority in shortfall, at risk of receivership.
Asheville's authority spent its cushion down. Over two years it drew down about 76 percent of its reserves, and its own monthly financial reports in early 2025 showed expenses running ahead of revenue. The chief operating officer told a local station the agency had lost roughly nine million dollars across two years. It would need an extra 1.8 million a year, for five years, just to get back to where it stood in 2023. The 2023 audit was finished late, in March 2025, and the interim finance chief told the board the delay had raised legal and audit costs.
So the cuts arrived. In April 2026 the authority eliminated 34 positions, about a fifth of its workforce, to save roughly 1.6 million a year. Most of those jobs, 22 of the 34, were the staff of an afterschool and summer program called PODS. It served around 120 children and had no long-term funding. The rest came out of maintenance, resident services, and administration. In June the agency went further, announcing it would shrink to fewer than fifty full-time staff by the end of 2027 and hand work like maintenance, inspections, and human resources to outside contractors.
The CEO framed it as stewardship. "We have a responsibility to be good stewards of public resources," Santos said. "Every dollar we spend should help us provide better housing, serve more families, and strengthen the long-term future of this organization." The agency says the restructuring will save about two percent of its budget a year and rebuild the reserves it burned.
Stewardship is the agency's word for it. From a resident's doorway, the same changes look different.
Fewer staff are now responsible for more empty apartments. Vacancies climbed from about 50 in 2023 to roughly 144 by April 2026. Every empty unit is both a family not housed and rent the authority is not collecting, which deepens the same hole the cuts are meant to fill. The afterschool program that watched around 120 kids is gone. Maintenance and inspections, the work that keeps a unit livable, will now run through contractors rather than people who answer to the authority directly.
And residents themselves face a new rule. Starting in June 2026, adults 18 to 61 who live in the authority's apartments or rent with one of its vouchers must put in at least 15 hours a week on average. Work counts, and so do school, job training, volunteering, and other qualifying activities, with no minimum income. Exemptions include residents 62 and older, residents with verified disabilities, heads of household who are the primary caregiver for a child under six, and some full-time students and special-purpose voucher holders. The rule reaches new residents first and existing ones in early 2027. The authority presents it as part of a push toward resident self-sufficiency. For a household already on the edge, it is one more condition attached to keeping the roof.
None of this means the authority is failing its core job, and it is fair to say so plainly.
The last HUD score on record for its public housing, from 2012, rated the authority a high performer. HUD's data, as ProPublica carries them through March 2019, show no score of that kind after nearly all of its apartments moved to the Section 8 platform in 2016. After Helene it did hold off evictions and forgive rent, and the federal government granted most of the regulatory waivers it asked for. Leadership inherited a hole it did not dig alone, and cutting a program with no funding behind it is the kind of hard call a board is supposed to make. A reasonable person can look at the same numbers and call the restructuring responsible.
The worry is not that anyone acted in bad faith. It is arithmetic. A safety net with half the staff, more empty units, and new conditions on residents is a thinner net, at the exact moment the waitlist runs four thousand families deep. That is the trade the city is making, whether or not it meant to.
A backstop you thin is still the backstop.
The reason this belongs on a site about homelessness is simple. The public housing authority is one of the last structures standing between a low-income family and the street, and right now it is being made smaller. Some of that was forced by a storm and a budget that ran dry. Some of it was chosen, in board votes and a restructuring plan, the way these things usually are.
That is also the part worth holding onto. A net that was thinned by decisions can be restored by decisions. Reserves can be rebuilt, positions can be funded, a waitlist four thousand deep can be treated as the emergency it is. The question Asheville is answering, quietly, in budget lines and contracts, is how much backstop it wants to keep paying for. The people in those fifteen hundred apartments do not get to vote on the answer. The rest of us, in a way, do.
Every group in our directory is local, vetted, and doing this work right now. Pick one and back it. →