The ROAD to Housing Act was left out of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) in the final House text released Sunday, leaving the mortgage industry to continue pushing for housing provisions into the first quarter of next year. 

The bipartisan bill — which includes policies to address housing affordability, boost supply, modernize financing options, reduce regulatory barriers and promote economic mobility — passed through the Senate banking committee in July with a unanimous vote and was approved by the full Senate in early October. But in the House, Republicans sought more room to shape their own housing legislation.

“This is a classic case of both the House and the Senate wanting to put their best foot forward on a key policy issue and just getting synchronized with one another,” Bill Killmer, senior vice president for legislative and political affairs at the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA), said in an interview with HousingWire.

“It’s remarkable that the Senate has been able to pass it unanimously this summer, but it’s also understandable that the House wanted to assert its prerogatives.” 

The House’s version of the package is expected to be unveiled by the end of the week. Lawmakers had flagged about a dozen provisions within the ROAD package they wanted to revisit or refine.

Industry experts say this creates an opportunity to insert additional single-family housing and homeownership measures, noting that the Senate version is viewed as heavily focused on affordable rental housing.

A markup in the House Committee on Financial Services is also possible next week.

“It is critical that we deliver real solutions that empower Americans and strengthen communities,” committee Chair French Hill (R-Ark.) said in a statement. “This month, the Financial Services Committee will advance solutions to tackle housing cost and access challenges for American families, homeowners and renters.

“Next year, we look forward to working with our Senate colleagues to send a bill to the president’s desk that reflects the views of both chambers and leads to more affordable choices for America’s homeowners and renters.”

Mortgage trade groups expressed disappointment that the housing provisions were removed from the NDAA. But they added that they were encouraged by the Trump administration’s focus on homeownership and by signs that Congress intends to address the housing package separately.

“Even without legislation, much can be done, and CHLA is excited that the Trump Administration is focused on homeownership actions like considering reducing loan-level price adjustment loan fees for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loans and streamlining regulatory barriers so that independent mortgage bankers can originate mortgage loans more efficiently and at a lower cost to borrowers,” said Scott Olson, executive director of the Community Home Lenders of America.

“Next week, the House Financial Services Committee will mark up several housing bills, including pieces of ROAD. We will keep pressing Congress to move comprehensive legislation early in 2026 that expands supply and makes housing more affordable for families across the country,” said Dennis Shea, executive vice president of the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Isaac Boltansky, head of public policy at Pennymac, said he is “cautiously optimistic that a major housing package will land on the president’s desk early next year.”

“We anticipate that the House Financial Services Committee will do thoughtful work to strengthen and expand the Senate-passed ROAD to Housing package, ensuring a strong bipartisan victory that maximizes both the breadth and depth of its impact,” Boltansky said.

Aleida and her granddaughter, Casey, are fighting back against council demands. Picture: Nine/A Current Affair

An elderly woman has been ordered by an Australian council to uproot her beloved garden or face severe fines in the latest case of NIMBY neighbours complaining about how others attempt to beautify their street.

Aleida has been working on her garden in Ballarat North for 40 years but now faces growing fines and the prospect of destroying her hard work after her local council said it was a trip hazard that needed to be scaled back.

The 86-year-old tends to her garden every day

“I love my flowers … It’s just nice to do it. I like being out there,” she told Nine’s A Current Affair.

“Kids call it their fairy garden. Even the bus once stopped and the driver got out and said ‘I got to compliment you on your garden’.”

In the past four decades, Aleida’s garden has grown to encompass the council trees on the nature strip outside her home but The City of Ballarat has told the Victorian great-great grandmother she needs to provide an unobstructed 1.5m pathway for pedestrians. The council’s requirements would mean Aleida needs to strip back almost half a metre of her garden.

MORE: Man pulls out 20m ‘monster’ in Aus backyard

Aleida and her granddaughter, Casey, believe the council is being heavy-handed about the garden. Picture: Nine/A Current Affair

MORE: The Aus suburbs most overrun by possums

Earlier this year, the council also ordered Aleida to remove several items from her gardens like bird baths and statues. When she didn’t comply within six weeks Aleida was fined $500 by the council.

Despite the pressure from council Aleida has so far refused to budge and she has the backing of her family as well.

“I have told her not to pay it (the fine) and I even asked (the council): “What are you going to do? Make her spend the rest of her days in prison?’” Aleida’s granddaughter Casey said.

Aleida has vowed never to pay the council fine and called out any neighbours who had made complaints about her garden.

“Mind your own business, and hope your lawn is as good as mine,” she said.

The council said there had been numerous formal complaints from the community about “unsafe pedestrian access on the nature strip”.

“We are empathetic towards Aleida’s situation as we can see the love and care she has put into her landscaping,” a statement issued to Nine read.

“However, it is vital that nature strips and pathways remain accessible to everyone.

“Due to repeated complaints, as far back as 2002, we have been in ongoing conversations with the homeowner for many years, encouraging her to clear the garden to allow a clear path of 1.5m from the edge of the road.

MORE: Tradie’s colossal 5.5m find in Aus backyard

Aleida has been tending the garden for 40 years. Picture: Nine/A Current Affair

“If the access improvements to the nature strip are carried out, we will withdraw the fine.”

Councils ordering residents to rip up their nature strips or cop heavy fines were highlighted recently after it was reported thousands of dollars worth of artificial turf could be destroyed and never replaced.

Among councils taking a hard line stance are the City of Gold Coast whose spokesman said they would release updated guidelines for all homeowners soon. The council has already heavily fined homeowners who do not comply, warning residents they will have to cough up $834 if prosecuted.

Elsewhere councils like the Queanbeyan-Palerang Regional Council in NSW are now following suit, with major discussions underway on a total ban on new installation of artificial turf.

A council statement confirmed they were proposing “removing artificial grass as an option for street verges” amid concerns that “artificial grass may contain microplastics and PFAS”.

Councils taking aim at artificial turf are justifying their response amid concerns about plastic pollution, microplastics in waterways, and the environmental impact of artificial turf which has been shown to heat up to extreme temperatures as high as 56C on hot summer days when normal grass heats to around 30C.

The post 86yo Victorian ordered by council to rip up home garden appeared first on realestate.com.au.

Nashville, one of the fastest-growing Sun Belt cities over the past decade, has been working to address the housing affordability issues that accompanied its massive economic development.

Confronted with a shortage of nearly 90,000 homes, the Nashville Metro Council
made its most significant move since 2018 to shape the city’s future. It passed two groundbreaking and controversial zoning measures, overcoming strong opposition to clear their final hurdle and become law.

With the adoption of these laws, Nashville joins a growing list of cities and states working to eliminate decades of restrictive zoning covenants and regulations. This move opens the door for more “missing middle” housing and increases density near urban transit corridors.

The votes capped months of heated debate over how the city should manage rapid growth while preserving affordability and neighborhood character.

Rhetoric from opponents reached a fever pitch. They challenged housing shortage estimates and questioned how infrastructure could handle more density. Supporters of the two initiatives built a coalition of business and civic leaders to push the legislation over the finish line in the 40-member city council.

“This bill is a good first step to addressing the housing crisis in Nashville, through a data-driven approach, which establishes building standards for a diversity of building types for different stages of life and income levels,” Council Member Jennifer Gamble, a sponsor of one of the bills, said in last week’s meeting.

New residential zoning types

One ordinance establishes two new baseline zoning districts—Residential Neighborhood and Residential Limited. Both districts permit a wider variety of housing types, including townhomes, triplexes, and quadplexes, in areas that are currently dominated by single-family homes.

Individual council members would request such zoning for their respective districts.

A second ordinance expands the ability to build detached accessory dwelling units (DADUs), increasing the housing supply by boosting residential density. The council adopted a substitute version that raises parking requirements, and Metro Planning must now track permits, new units, and related infrastructure costs.

During a four-hour meeting, council members supporting the DADU ordinance described it as a modest but meaningful affordability measure, arguing that more small-scale units can provide options for middle-income residents excluded from the single-family home market.

Additionally, the council advanced a third bill capping the height of so-called “tall skinnies” at two and a half stories. For the past decade, zoning allowed detached duplexes—two houses on a single-family lot—leading to the widespread development of these houses, especially in The Nations, a trendy West Nashville neighborhood, where they have climbed from two to three stories and often command seven-figure prices.

Opponents vow to continue fighting

Opponents of the new zoning measures questioned whether city infrastructure could keep up with increased density and called for more public input. Councilmember Jeff Eslick, who voted against the core rezoning bill, argued, “upzoning without infrastructure doesn’t strengthen a neighborhood, it strains it.”

Opposition to these laws is likely to continue, much like in other cities and states. In Massachusetts, residents tried to repeal the 2021 Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Communities Act—which mandates more multifamily housing near transit stations in 177 communities—but failed to secure enough signatures for a 2026 ballot measure.

In Charlottesville, Virginia, a legal challenge over a 2023 zoning ordinance that allowed multiplex housing in single-family areas temporarily left the city without zoning. The city settled by agreeing to conduct infrastructure and transportation studies, as residents argued these should have preceded the law’s passage.

Nashville’s own zoning battles began after a councilmember rezoned 300 acres in The Nations to allow 40 units per acre, aiming to improve affordability in the rapidly gentrifying neighborhood. Opponents failed to recall him or gather enough signatures and later filed an ethics complaint, alleging intimidation and harassment during the recall effort.

Dissenters have pledged to oppose the 29 Metro Council members who supported the new zoning laws and plan further resistance as the new rules are enacted.

After federal housing leaders issued a request for information in October about the future of two key reverse mortgage programs, the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association (NRMLA) weighed in last week with a detailed list of suggestions.

The trade group issued an 11-page letter to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) in which it touched upon multiple aspects of the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) and HECM Mortgage-Backed Securities (HMBS) programs.

NRMLA isn’t the only industry stakeholder to provide feedback to government officials.

Late last month, the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) offered seven recommendations to reform the programs. Its letter focused on better liquidity options through Ginnie Mae to support the resecuritization of high-balance loans, along with a scaling back of the upfront mortgage insurance program that’s been criticized for suppressing borrower demand.

The MBA also spoke out in favor of alternatives to the second appraisal requirement for some HECM loans. It seeks increased use of automated valuation models (AVMs) and other ways of cutting costs and processing times. Meanwhile, the Appraisal Institute told government officials that it supports the second appraisal rule because it “provides an essential check against overvaluation risk.”

What does NRMLA want?

In an interview with HousingWire’s Reverse Mortgage Daily, NRMLA President Steve Irwin said his organization “firmly believes that the FHA-insured HECM program is a critical foundation from which new products can be developed, and other cool and exciting innovation can happen.”

But the HECM and HMBS programs, which have been mainstays of the industry for decades, will need to evolve to keep pace with the multitude of proprietary reverse mortgages now on the market, he added.

In its letter to federal housing officials, NRMLA stressed that proprietary products will not fulfill the needs of many borrowers. Private-label products with adjustable rates are available in roughly 27 states and fixed-rate products in 34 states, while a handful of states like Maryland and Tennessee prohibit all proprietary reverse mortgages.

Possibly the biggest disadvantage of the HECM in relation to a private-label loan is the upfront mortgage insurance premium (MIP), which is 2% of the home’s value. NRMLA said this cost is especially detrimental to borrowers who are withdrawing a smaller percentage of their home equity, and it estimates that about 25% of potential HECM originations have been lost since risk-based pricing was eliminated by the FHA in late 2017.

“What we see is, given the current macroeconomic conditions, some people are not able to qualify because of high upfront costs associated with that initial mortgage insurance premium,” Irwin said.

The trade group is advocating for a return to the former structure in which borrowers who initially withdraw 60% or less of the principal limit factor would pay an upfront fee of 0.5% of the home’s value. It also suggests that the annual MIP for these borrowers could be increased from its current figure of 0.5% to cover any actuarial losses to the FHA’s Mutual Mortgage Insurance Fund.

“Borrowers are more sensitive to up-front costs than ongoing rates since they do not make mortgage payments,” NRMLA explained in its letter. “… This proposal would also improve the fairness of the program; homeowners that borrow more, and pose a higher level of risk, will pay more into the MMI fund.”

Ideas for HMBS reform

The trade group also referenced some key changes it would like to see for the HMBS program. Among these is a shift away from the Constant Maturity Treasury (CMT) to the Secure Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) that’s been an investor benchmark for a few years. This would “improve the efficiency and pricing of the HMBS market,” NRMLA argued.

As it currently stands, floating-rate securities issued by Ginnie Mae are based on a SOFR index that resets each month. But HECM loans that underpin the securities are indexed to the one-year CMT, creating a “mismatch” that leads to less favorable pricing and reduced investor demand.

“We don’t want HMBS to be an outlier, nor a niche product, when it comes to the utilization of the indices used,” Irwin explained. “And as investors get more comfortable modeling the SOFR indices, we don’t think we should be operating with a disconnect and a reliance on the CMT indices.”

Irwin also touched on the idea for a new HMBS security that’s gaining support throughout the industry. This would “directly address significant liquidity and operational risks currently faced by issuers and, indirectly, Ginnie Mae and FHA.”

The new offering would contain HECM loans that must be repurchased from their HMBS pools after reaching 98% of their maximum claim amount (MCA). Critically, NRMLA said the new offering would not require lenders to buy out the resecuritized loans at 98% of their MCA, nor would it require a buyout of any related tail issuance.

The trade group referenced the late 2022 bankruptcy of Reverse Mortgage Funding as “stark evidence of the risks inherent in the current HMBS structure,” writing that the company was unable to finance the mandatory repurchase of these high-balance loans due to higher interest rates and declining investor demand.