by Dereen Shirnekhi The New Haven independent
When Patrick Nutt moved from the city’s hotel-turned-homeless shelter on Foxon Boulevard to a one-bedroom apartment in a new West River affordable housing complex, he had no income, a Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) subsidy, and a starting rent of $0.
Two months later, after securing cash assistance from the state, his monthly rent bumped up to $59.
A few months after that, after falling behind on his portion of the rent, Nutt received a pre-eviction notice from his landlord ordering him to leave.
Nutt is one of seven Section 8 recipients to be hit with eviction lawsuits at this same complex in recent months. He is now fighting in housing court to hold on to his apartment and avoid a potential return to homelessness.
“It’s insane,” Nutt, 60, told the Independent on Thursday. “An eviction notice is like the end of the world.”
Nutt is a tenant at the Curtis Cofield II Estates. That’s the 56-unit, all-electric, 11-building complex that opened last June atop a 4.3‑acre site bounded by Legion Avenue, Ella T. Grasso Boulevard, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, and Tyler Street. The complex is owned by an affiliate of the New York-based affordable housing developer NHP Foundation. The property is managed by Massachusetts-based HallKeen Management.
Since December, the complex’s landlord has filed a total of 22 eviction lawsuits.
The landlord has alleged that these tenants have not paid rent. Some tenants have claimed that their nonpayment of rent was due to miscommunication on the landlord’s part, as well as frequent turnover of property managers.
While the property manager has said that they do not intend on kicking anyone out, and while many of these cases have been resolved and withdrawn, 12 eviction lawsuits against Curtis Cofield tenants — including Nutt — are still working their way through court.
Nutt’s ongoing court case raises questions about why the owner of a deeply publicly subsidized affordable housing complex filed so many eviction lawsuits so relatively quickly against poor and formerly homeless tenants.
It also points to an apparent communication breakdown among the landlord, the Housing Authority of New Haven (HANH), and at least six of the eight Curtis Cofield tenants who receive Project Based Vouchers (PBVs) through the Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV) program, formerly known as Section 8. (At least one tenant in the complex receives a tenant-based, rather than a project-based, voucher.)
HANH has had a contract with the landlord since January 2025 for 8 PBVs at the Curtis Cofield complex. “All eight units are allocated to homeless families receiving supportive services,” according to a resolution approved by the housing authority’s board in November 2024.
HallKeen representative Alicia Pollard told the Independent in January that the property management company does not set the resident portion of the rent for those like Nutt who receive rental assistance. “Instead, it is calculated by an independent, third-party agency based on verified household income, typically at approximately 30 percent of reported income.” Pollard declined to confirm whether the “independent, third-party agency” was HANH.
Pollard also explained that residents may believe that their rent is one amount, due to preliminary income information, but when the “administering agency” completes a final income certification, “the resident portion of rent may be adjusted, as required by program regulations. These determinations are made by the administering agency and are outside the control of property management.”
“When such adjustments occur, it is the responsibility of the third-party agency to notify the resident of any rent changes,” Pollard said. “As required under the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, residents acknowledge the full contract rent in their lease, which defines the contractual rent amount should rental assistance change or end.”
Nutt said that when he signed his Curtis Cofield lease in May 2025, his rent was $0. He had just spent 14 months living at the city’s hotel-turned-homeless shelter at 270 Foxon Blvd. He didn’t have income.
Then, he began getting around $200 per month from the Department of Social Services. He was told to sign a new lease at the end of July, when he saw that he owed $59.
Nutt said that he never heard directly from HANH that his rent had increased from $0.
He also said that, after he signed a new lease on July 31 and saw that his rent had gone up from $0 to $59, he didn’t pay August or September rent. He wasn’t able to remember why; he said that he has consistently paid his rent since October.
Nutt isn’t the only Section 8 recipient at Curtis Cofield who started out with a $0 rent, and subsequently ended up in eviction court.
M, who the Independent spoke with in January and requested to just be referred to by her first initial, said she moved into Curtis Cofield in April 2025 after being homeless. She currently lives in a two-bedroom unit with her two kids.
M said that when she first signed her lease, she was told that she would be paying $0 in rent. That made sense to her because she had no income. Then, she said she was asked to sign a new lease. She didn’t realize her new lease had her paying $226 per month until September, according to court filings.
“I didn’t even know that I had rent until I found out the day after my birthday that I owe $1,000 in back rent,” she told the Independent.
Shelley White is a New Haven Legal Assistance Association (NHLAA) attorney who, alongside her colleagues, is representing 11 Curtis Cofield tenants in court. “I don’t know how this happened,” she said about all the eviction lawsuits filed against Section 8 recipients. “I really don’t.”
White believes that these tenants’ rents were initially $0 because HANH hadn’t sent payments for the PBV rents until August 2025, despite the contract having taken effect on Jan. 1 and the first PBV recipients moving in in April.
“It’s my understanding they did not make any payments before Aug. 6,” White said, due to the fact that the units hadn’t undergone inspection until then — a requirement for Housing and Urban Development (HUD) subsidies. White believes that after payments kicked in, PBV recipients’ rents changed.
In response to questions about HANH’s contract with West River Housing Company LLC, the holding company that legally owns the property, a HANH spokesperson confirmed that its over-arching entity, Elm City Communities (ECC), executed the PBV contract for Curtis Cofield II Estates on Jan. 1, 2025 for eight PBVs. “An amendment executed in August did not establish a new contract start date or authorize retroactive subsidy; it administratively aligned previously approved rent levels with the contract.”
The spokesperson continued by stating, “Under HUD regulations, rent approval is separate from subsidy payment. ECC may only determine tenant rent share and begin housing assistance payments after a household is determined eligible, a fully executed lease is received as proof of occupancy, the unit passes Housing Quality Standards (HQS), and a valid HAP contract is in effect. If a household occupies a unit prior to these approvals, the tenancy is considered a private arrangement, and ECC does not provide subsidy.”
HANH did not respond to follow-up questions about when its subsidies began or whether the housing authority or any other entity had notified tenants at this complex when their rent had changed.
White said that, to her understanding from talking to tenants, updated rents were communicated by the housing authority to management in September, which communicated them to tenants. White said that tenants with subsidized rents didn’t receive official notice from HANH until November — after tenants received notices to quit, which are legal pre-eviction filings.
White also said that she hasn’t seen PBV tenancy addendums attached to her clients’ leases. Those are addendums for subsidized units that spell out what the tenants’ share of rent is, how much the housing authority is going to pay, and clearly state that the tenant is not liable if the housing authority doesn’t make a payment and that the tenants’ portion can change as income changes.
“Say the rent is $1,306,” said White. The tenant’s lease will say that they are responsible for $1,306. “The addendum says that the owner agrees that the tenant is only responsible for their share as determined by the housing authority.”
According to copies of tenants’ leases uploaded in housing court filings, M’s April lease says that she owes $2,240 per month “unless modified by addenda.” At the end of her 18-page lease, an addendum says that her “2-bedroom maximum rental amount will be $1,567.”
While declining to comment on specific tenants’ court cases, Pollard told the Independent for a previous article about another formerly homeless tenant in eviction court that residents “may choose to engage with the on-site Resident Services Coordinator, who can provide a wide range of referrals and supports, including resident retention services. In addition, formerly homeless residents who are clients of Columbus House receive an enhanced level of supportive services through an on-site supportive services case manager.”
Nutt, whose tenant portion went up to $59 per month, had his first lease uploaded in court filings by West River Housing LLC. That lease says his rent is $2,140. In pen, someone has written “paid for by HA.”
That’s the case for at least two other PBV recipients. A fifth tenant’s lease is similar to M’s, stating that her rent is $1,834. On the last page of her lease, an addendum states that her maximum rent for her 1-bedroom will be $1,834. That number is then crossed out in ink and replaced with $1,306.
“Retroactive rent adjustments are permitted under affordable housing and voucher program regulations,” Pollard, the property manager representative, told the Independent for a previous story about Curtis Cofield eviction lawsuits. “At move-in, all residents sign a lease stating that rent is due on the first of each month and that they are responsible for their portion of rent from the date of occupancy, regardless of subsidy status.”
Nutt said that despite the lawsuit, he’s feeling OK. He thinks the case will be withdrawn. “I still talk to the people that are in the office here and it’s not like anybody’s hostile, there’s no ill will,” he said.
After years of homelessness, Nutt’s happy to have a place of his own. “I love it here,” he said. “I’m not going anywhere.”
Renee Storo, another PBV recipient, declined a full interview but only had nice things to say about Curtis Cofield. “I am grateful to be living at Curtis Cofield Estates and want to continue to live there. I think mistakes have been made and are being corrected,” Storo said over text. She said that a new property manager “is always willing to help anyone that lives here” and has resolved issues that Storo and others had with a previous manager.
“It’s not the same place once new property manager came,” she said. “She’s strict but fair and wants us all to have a beautiful and safe place to call home. They are working hard to get the people that should be living here…here and the few bad apples out. My kids and I love it here. We have a beautiful place and my kids have made friends with the other children here. We’re finally happy and just want it to stay that way.”