Senator BROOKE. Thank you very much for your statement. I certainly agree wholeheartedly that the interpretation of the Brooke amendment is certainly not that which was intended by the proposer or by either of the Banking and Currency Committees or by the Congress. I might report to you that it is my understanding that the General Counsel for HUD, who made this interpretation, is leaving HUD. I cannot be overjoyed, obviously, but I am not hurt by circumstance, I want to assure you. I am very hopeful that in choosing another General Counsel, they will choose one who interprets the law as the law is written. Lawyers disagree, of course, with interpretation of statutory language, but I am very hopeful that we might get a somewhat different interpretation from the new General Counsel, whoever he may be.

We are not going to wait on that, of course. We are going to press forward with our legislation, so that there will be no doubt in anyone's mind that we will not in the future be subjected again to a misinterpretation of the statute.

Thank you again, you have been very helpful.

Mr. KABOT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for everything you have done for the Public Housing Authority.

Senator BROOKE. I am just beginning. We are hopeful that it may be

more.

How many low-income families are turned away annually by the large authorities because housing units simply are not there? Can you or Mr. Bernstein answer that? If you cannot, will you supply it for us later?

Mr. KABOT. If you are talking about large families with low incomes, there are many of them, much more if you are talking about the smaller families. I can only speak for Newark, but I know that right now we have 27 families in one particular urban renewal area, that have at least four or more children, and because of lack of units, these families cannot be relocated. There is a definite need for units for families requiring three or more bedrooms. There are many turned away because of lack of units for the smaller families, but particularly in Newark, our biggest problem is with the large families.

Senator BROOKE. To what extent is public housing in Newark on scattered sites? Do you believe that this approach is successful?

Mr, BERNSTEIN. We are making efforts in our city, Mr. Senator, to spread the program of scattered sites for public housing. We believe it will be successful. However, as one witness in the field of housing, I would have to also indicate my own reservations. I think we are also beginning to see some of the kind of response that has come out of suburban areas, in the city itself, resistance in various sections of the city to location of public housing projects in that specific community. I think at some point we may have to face up to a situation that may very well grow as the urban area begins to mirror this sort of restriction that exists in the suburban areas; but thus far, however, we are moving ahead and have just recently announced a series of scattered programs in the city of Boston, and we are quite hopeful.

Mr. KABOT. Mr. Chairman, may I just add to that. We in Newark are working on a program now of 200 scattered site units, and we are prepared to bring it before the new city council within the next few weeks. This would take into account, Mr. Chairman, many, many private homes which have had mortgages by FHA and the GI mortgages, which have been repossessed by them, and we hope to be able to buy these homes, rehabilitate them and lease them to low-income families, and perhaps build them up to a point where, within a matter of 2 or 3 years, they are in a position to be able to buy them and have homeownership through this process. I think this is a very interesting program, and we are looking forward to it if we can get city council approval.

Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would like to take 1 second to address myself very briefly to one point we did not touch and that the Council of Large Housing Authorities did not really touch. This is in relation to another bill that you have introduced-the bill to provide an experimental program-an experimental basis for a housing allowance program. I say that speaking for our own authority in Boston, knowing the situation, how tight housing is, and how very slow it is to produce the additional public housing, it would be our strong feeling that we would like to tender our support and endorsement of the proposal to extend the 25 percent rent income, the allowance to use in private housing on an experimental basis. I think we would find

that this sort of experimental program would be very necessary and important because of the existing shortages and the importance of taking advantage of whatever existing stock we can.

Senator BROOKE. We are very grateful for that support. Frankly, I became interested in this because there are just literally thousands and thousands of poor who are unable to get into public housing accommodations, and where we are providing a ceiling on rents for those who are fortunate enough to get into public housing accommodations, those who are still living in private housing accommodations are paying 30-35 percent of their income for rent. There is just absolutely no justification for this at all.

As you have well pointed out, Mr. Bernstein, it may be sometime before you can have public housing accommodations that house thousands. I am not so sure that we want only public housing in the country, anyway. I think we should have private housing as well.

If this experimental program is successful-and, of course, we hope to expand it on a large basis-it would require tremendous expenditure of money, but I think it is money well spent, so we are very pleased to have the support of the council for this legislation.

Mrs. Hall, you have been very patient, and we welcomed you earlier. We are very pleased to have Mrs. Gwen Louise Hall, who is the vice chairman of the Cleveland Metropolitan Housing Authority, one of the big cities. We would be pleased to have your statement at this time.

STATEMENT OF GWEN LOUISE HALL, VICE CHAIRMAN, CLEVELAND METROPOLITAN HOUSING AUTHORITY, CLEVELAND, OHIO

Mrs. HALL. Mr. Chairman, increase in rent to low-income tenants of public housing will be very detrimental, for increase in rent and no increase in salary or subsidy from the Government is another form of slow death.

At this present time, low-income and limited-income persons are paying more rent than they can afford. It also causes social ills where a public assistance tenant's rent is maneuvered by the public assistance department. The tenant that has an income of the same but is underemployed, their rent will be increased and cause a mother already frustrated more frustration. When are you going to stop castrating and penalizing human beings for being poor?

Housing is a main part of living. Just because a person is underemployed doesn't mean that they do not want adequate and decent housing. The low-income people have already been overexploited in their respective communities. Is the Government going to continue to condone this exploitation of human beings? It is a fact that persons of limited income who receive public assistance do pay taxes when paying rent, utilities, and when they buy in the stores. No one asks them are you on public assistance or limited income-they just add

the tax.

Tenants are no longer going to continue being passive to this castration by the Government. It is necessary that the Government increase the subsidies and authorize more funds to local authorities so that the needs of the low income and public assistance tenants can be_met humanly and decently. Human life first, monetary means second.

Senator BROOKE. Thank you very much for your statement. I am sure that all of the witnesses who have testified will agree with you wholeheartedly in what you have said. That is exactly what we are trying to do by this proposed legislation, which I trust you support wholeheartedly.

The next witness will be another panel, consisting of Mrs. Rosetta Wylie, president of the Residents Advisory Board of the city of Philadelphia; Mr. Harold Staley, director of the City-Wide Tenants Union in Washington, D.C.; Mr. John Connally, tenant commissioner of the Boston Housing Authority; and Mrs. Jean King, midwestern vice chairman of the National Tenants Organization of affiliate St. Louis. While they are taking their seats, the chairman wishes to express his appreciation to those tenants who, by their presence here today, indicate their support of the legislation which has been proposed by this committee. I want the record to show that you are here, have been here in large numbers, and we are most appreciative for your presence and your support of this legislation.

Let me say to the panel that we are working under a tight schedule, and there are still other witnesses to be heard. You could summarize your statements, and the entire text of your statement, of course, will be included in the record. I might want to reserve some time to ask questions from your statements, which we have before us. Mr. Staley, you will proceed first.

STATEMENT OF HAROLD STALEY, DIRECTOR, CITY-WIDE TENANTS UNION, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Mr. STALEY. Mr. Chairman, to my left is Mrs. Wylie, from Philadelphia; Mrs. King to my right, from St. Louis; and Mr. John Connally, from Boston. Behind me is Kirk White, from the Legal Service and Urban Law Institute.

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Harold Staley, director of the City-Wide NCHA Tenant Union of Washington, D.C. I am accompanied by our attorney, Kirk White of the neighborhood legal services program and the Urban Law Institute. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you to discuss public housing problems and legislative solutions. My remarks will be directed to the problem of dilapidation in public housing.

The City-Wide Tenant Union is a nonprofit organization of public housing tenants in Washington. It seeks to promote the interests of public housing tenants living in units run by the National Capital Housing Authority, our local housing agency. We work every day in project areas with tenants to get official response to bad housing conditions and to stimulate tenants to take an interest in improving their own living environment.

We have made survey after survey of housing conditions in the Washington public housing dwellings. We have discovered slum conditions beyond belief. I am here today to testify to the need to require local housing authorities to comply with local health and housing codes and ordinances and to urge passage of Senator Brooke's recent bills which will speed up the funding for maintenance and repairs. where tenant rents are insufficient to cover all costs.

The problems of maintenance in public housing in Washington are

typical of problems in most big cities; and at the same time our problems are unique because we as tenants and as residents of Washington have no, I repeat no, say in, or influence over, the way public housing is run here. NCHA is an independent Federal agency with no meaningful local control. We are entirely at the mercy of appointed officials and civil service employees. I frankly do not know how they can cash their paychecks in good conscience, with conditions as they are in NCHA properties.

It seems today that we who are concerned about the condition of public housing are voices crying in the wilderness. Everyone in official position professes concern but they don't deliver repairs. They duck and say this is Government housing-housing codes can't apply. Do they really mean that only private landlords have a duty to maintain their properties? It seems so. We ask that you include a seetion in the public housing law that local housing authorities must comply with local codes that are intended to protect the health and safety of all tenants. When tenants see that housing officials are also subject to the law, they will respond by carrying out their own duties under law-to care for their units and to respect the rights of their neighbors. Official vandalism of property through neglect breeds the worst sort of cynicism and despair. We must put an end to this cycle. As I am sure you know, bad housing conditions breed crime and despair. You can imagine how a family would feel if the housing officials allow holes in walls, ceilings and floors to go unrepaired for months on end. How would a mother feel when her children stay sick with colds all winter because of lack of heat and poor insulation? And yet she must still pay up to one-quarter of her income for rent because if she does not she would be evicted.

A recent incident will highlight the frustration caused by official neglect. We complained about an open window at floor level in a highrise apartment stairwell. A child fell out of this window and was injured. Weeks went by and that window went unrepaired. Finally, they put in a small wood panel saying that they had run out of windows.

A second illustration of the damage caused by official neglect in public housing involves defective incinerators in a high-rise project which cause smoke to circulate daily in tenants' apartments. Doctors who serve these tenants have stated that there is a clear relationshin between the smoke and chest illnesses observed in parents and children of that building.

We called and spoke to the housing manager, the maintenance supervisor several times and nothing happened. When a newspaper got onto the story, they finally decided to stop using the incinerators. Because they don't have the money to fix the incinerators, trash is piling up and the rats are back.

Official inspections by District of Columbia officials have recorded 40,000 housing code violations in NCHA properties. There are over 600 units out of occupancy because they are in need of major repairs. The District of Columbia City Council issued a report recommending repairs but HUD has yet to act on NCHA's application for repair funds under the 1969 Brooke-Sparkman amendments.

I could go on for several hours describing the deplorable conditions in public housing in Washington and we could go on for days with similar problems in other cities-even to the point of describing land