AMENDMENTS OF TITLE II OF NATIONAL HOUSING ACT. SEC. 104. Section 207 (a) of said Act, as amended, is hereby amended— (1) by inserting in paragraph numbered (1) a comma followed by the words "including facilities for trailer coach mobile dwellings" immediately following the phrase "designed principally for residential use." (2) by strking out the period at the end of paragraph numbered (8) and inserting the words "or space in a trailer court or park properly arranged and equipped to accomodate a trailer coach mobile dwelling.". SEC. 105. Section 207 (c) of said Act, as amended, is hereby amended by inserting in paragraph numbered (3) the words "or not to exceed $1,000 per space or $300,000 per mortgage for trailer courts or parks" immediately following the parenthesis and words "four per family unit". Senator ALLEN J. ELLENDER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, DEAR SENATOR: In connection with the proposed Federal Housing Act of 1954 which is now a bill under consideration in Congress, I want you to know my attitude in view of the active rehabilitation program in effect under our newly created Department of Housing Improvement and Slum Prevention of the City of New Orleans. Title I, pertains to Government insurance of loans to private individuals and I am in favor of this section as presently revised in the proposed bill with the exception that all title I loans should be discounted in their full amount at a rate of 5 percent, instead of the amount in excess of $2,500 being at a reduced rate. Title II loans should bear interest at the prevailing market rate. Title IV adds "slum rehabilitation and conservation" to the existing "slum redevelopment" programs. I am extremely interested in this title as New Orleans, under its present "housing improvement and slum clearance" program, would be eligible to participate in the Federal aid now available to cities under the urban redevelopment program. As you so well know, we urgently need these funds for street paving, sewer extensions and other public utilities, as well as for proper planning. Section 414 of this title also sets up a $5 million fund for development and testing purposes of methods to successfully combat slums. I am sure Cliff Favrot and Colonel Hubbard have briefed you in the past few months on the recently created housing improvement and slum prevention department of the city. We appropriated over $100,000 to be used by this department in 1954. Even with the success obtained so far with the large budget appropriation, much is left to be desired in the staffing of this department. We need statisticians, social workers and much planning to develop and test the actual results which will be obtained. Under this section, 414, I feel that we will be eligible, as New Orleans is definitely considered a pilot city by Albert Cole, to obtain much needed funds to expand and develop our local program. I would appreciate it if you will keep me advised of the progress of this bill. HOMOGRAF, Hon. H. ALEXANDER SMITH, Sheraton Park, Washington, D. C. East Detroit, Mich., March 12, 1954. MY DEAR SENATOR: To enable you to evaluate the contents of this letter you should know some facts about the writer. I have been in the construction field for 32 years, was a charter member of both local and national builders associations, and was a director in both until 1952, when I resigned from active duty and was awarded a life membership. This was done to enable me to devote more time to my other affairs. I am a registered construction engineer and publisher. My firm's name is Homograf Co., which does an international business serving the public with house plans, specification guides, material lists, etc., all of which tends to promote better housing on this continent. The reason for this letter is not to criticize the President's recommendation on housing or the President's Advisory Committee Report, but rather to implement their recommendations. In our work it is necessary to know the requirements of the average family for good decent housing and also the manner in which this housing can be acquired. This includes the material supplies, builders, and financing phases. Study of our continuous national survey and a review of the housing recommendations lead me to believe that there is a lack of parity for the small-business man and a large segment of our prospective homeowners. Also, a good potential for increased administrative cost. Up to now, the majority of homes built were financed without the aid of FHA or VA valuation, inspection, or mortgage insurance. However, legislation such as proposed, if enacted without parity for the unorganized groups, such as smallbusiness men and the thousands of people who want to build or acquire a home as their neighbors have done, will cause the further loss of ground for these groups. Now, here is what we believe would implement the housing recommendations and create parity for all: 1. Recognize private enterprise to the fullest and eliminate duplication of services by Government which can be rendered privately. 2. Recognize the national housing code as endorsed by the BOCA as the standard for construction. 3. Accept local building and safety engineers' inspections for health and safety factors. 4. Accept private disinterested qualified appraisers' appraisal for replacement and market value on which to base loans. 5. Use private qualified engineers and appraisers for plan and specification compliance inspectors. 6. Provide for FHA and VA to function only as a mortgage-insuring agency by eliminating and setting of local construction and property standards and substituting of local professional services. 7. Provide for the insuring of any habitable structure that is healthy and safe with sufficient economic value to be merchantable according to local authorities. Such insurance should be of an amount with an amortization period in keeping with the value and life of the structure. 8. Streamline the insuring procedure and make it workable and available to all lenders without the necessity of special approval or training. Trusting that the eight suggestions will be of value when considering new housing-legislation proposals, I am Sincerely yours, ARVID C. PETERSEN. STATEMENT OF NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN, INC. The National Council of Jewish Women is a voluntary association of over 100,000 individual members, whose primary objective is the promotion of the general welfare. Under our community welfare program our sections in some 246 communities throughout the United States are carrying on projects designed to meet the needs of the community. Because of their intimate contact with community problems, they have long ago recognized the vital importance of decent housing to the development of better communities. The realization that good housing is one of the fundamental needs of any community caused our members to adopt a resolution in support of public housing in 1911. Since then our organization urged the adoption and actively supported proposals for a national housing policy consistent wtih the objective of a decent home for all Americans. The Housing Act of 1949 as it relates particularly to public housing and urban redevelopment, was strongly supported by our members. We followed carefully the deliberations of the President's Advisory Committee on Government housing policy and programs and were pleased to note that the committee recognized the public housing program as an important and integral part of an overall national housing policy. Recently Mr. Albert M. Cole, the Administrator of the Housing and Home Finance Agency who also served as chairman of the Advisory Committee, had this to say when he discussed the Federal Government's role in housing: "It is imperative that we all realize at once-as did the Advisory Committeethat we cannot attack these problems piecemeal. We have a comprehensive program of three essential and interrelated parts which cannot be considered independently. * * * "By treating the improvement of houses and neighborhoods, and the clearance of slums, as a whole on the one hand, and the supply of all types of housing, new and old, as a whole on the other hand, I think we establish the basic premises to enable families to improve their housing conditions and thus, for cities to improve their standards. "But the free flow of families from undesirable into desirable houses and neighborhoods as they are made available presupposes that all these families are able to do just that. Most of our families can, of course, buy or rent adequate homes on the private market. But unfortunately there are still large numbers in all our cities who cannot do so. Their incomes are too low ** "These are the people whose housing problems constitute one of the most serious roadblocks we have to the clearance and prevention of slums and to the renewal of our cities. Their problems must be solved, or we have just failed to solve the problems of slums and blight * * *. "If we expect to clear slums and renew our cities, the housing problems of these families must be squarely faced and solved." In view of this demonstrated need, it is difficult to understand why the bill now pending before your committee (S. 2938) does not recognize the needs of those who need housing most. The Housing Act of 1949 authorized the construction of 135,000 public housing units a year. It is now estimated that in order to meet the need 200,000 units a year should be constructed. In spite of the growing need for this type of housing, Congress last year took action which will virtually liquidate the program unless the provisions contained in the independent offices appropriation bill are repealed. The Housing Act of 1949 was considered and recommended by the Banking and Currency Committee which is charged with the responsibility of developing and recommending national housing programs. It would seem, therefore, that the responsibility for changes in the programs recommended by the Housing Act of 1949 should not be delegated to the Appropriations Committee whose sole responsibility is to deal with the expenditure of Federal funds. In this connection, we wish to state our support of the amendment introduced by Senator Maybank which places the responsibility for public housing properly within the responsibility of your committee. The bill before your committee provides for an urban renewal program which is designed to clear and prevent slums. In order to carry out this program successfully, there must be some way to provide homes for those who will be displaced. The only aid provided in the pending bill, for those who will be displaced by urban renewal, is the program of low-cost housing produced through private means. The feasibility of constructing $7,000 homes has been seriously questioned by many and it has been stated by those who are familiar with the situation that in many parts of the country, it would be impossible to do so. It would seem to us, therefore, that the entire program of urban renewal cannot be successful unless a substantial public housing program is authorized by Congress. We respectfully urge your committee to amend the pending bill in such a way as to permit the construction of the number of public housing units required to take care of the needs of those who are not able to avail themselves of housing produced through private means. STATEMENT OF NATIONAL ESTABLISHED ROOFING, SIDING & INSULATING CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, INC., C. N. NICHOLS, MANAGING DIRECTOR No other segment of the building industry has grown any faster than the maintenance, repair, and home-improvement business. This has been accomplished without any extra special aid from Government or private sources since FHA title I was first established 20 years ago. In the last decade the volume of business as indicated by all information available has increased from a billion dollars to approximately 7 billion annually. In 1949 I appeared before the Banking and Currency Committees of both Houses in behalf of a phase of FHA title I as contained in the Housing Act. I made a statement, with tongue in cheek, that I represented a "$2 billion business carried on by 25,000 contractors." At that time there were not so many sources of information available. All we could do was take opinions from persons in the industry. Today I am proud to say that the annual business of maintaining the homes of this country has more than tripled in dollar volume and that now we know that approximately 100,000 business firms participate; that they employ an average of 5 persons, which means directly about 2 million persons are fed and housed through the efforts of the contractors for whom I am speaking. Now, if the maintenance and repair business has shown such progress under the past housing acts, then I predict, if the sections of the Housing Act of 1954 which we are supporting are enacted, it will increase the prospects for those engaged in the industry twofold in the next 5 years. Compare the possibilities to many so-called big businesses and you will realize why my representation is important to the economy of this country. The value of this great upsurge in the maintaining of property requirements is not alone in the dollar-and-cents class. Through the ability of the property owner to have Government FHA title I guaranteed loans, properties can be maintained in the interest of the health and comfort of their occupants. Without credit terms which have existed and which we ask you to liberalize, the 41 percent of homes built before 1920 would certainly be out of use; the 19 percent constructed between 1920-29 would be well on their way to uselessness: certainly many repairs and improvements would be necessary on the 19 percent which appeared during period 1930-44; and, finally, a large percentage of the remaining 21 percent established since 1945 need new facilities to take care of the rapidly increasing birthrate. The maintenance, repair, and home-improvement contractors for whom I am speaking today have every right to ask this Congress to take into serious consideration the situation on improvement loans whereby the owner of the homes in the above percentage categories, as supplied by the Housing and Finance Agency of the United States Government, can have equal opportunity through as favorable credit terms as the citizen who elects to purchase a new home. The President's Advisory Committee on Government Housing and Programs has asked for the equalization of home-improvement loans with those given newhome buyers. The organized home-improvement contractors of the United States join with the committee in requesting parity with the home builders. Before indicating our specific requests, I wish to go on record for our businesses as endorsing 100 percent the statement of basic policy as expressed by the President's advisory committee when the President's committee states: "It is the conviction of this committee that the constant improvement of the living conditions of all the people is best accomplished under a strong, free, competitive economy; that every action taken by Government in respect to housing should be for the purpose of facilitating the operation of that economy to provide adequate housing for all the people to meet demands for new building, to assure the maintenance, restoration, and utilization of the existing stock of housing, and the elimination of conditions that create hazards to public safety and welfare and to the economic health of our communities; and that only those measures that prove to be successful in meeting these objectives should be continued." One behalf of the responsible, reputable, and reliable home-improvement contractors, I also wish to endorse wholeheartedly the statement by the committee that "The Federal Housing Administration should utilize every available administrative control to assure that homeowners are protected against possible losses from irresponsible parties utilizing the modernization program under title I of the National Housing Act." Specifically, in my appeal I wish to plead for 1. Amendment of the present Housing Act to provide for increasing the dollar amount of insured FHA title I loans. 2. The lengthening of period in which the loan can be repaid. 3. Amendment of the Housing Act to permit FHA to insure open-end mortgages. 4. Amendment of the Housing Act to grant equal mortgage terms to the purchasers of a presently built home as to new-home financing. Each of these amendments is in the interest of the homeowner, whether he wishes to fix up the old property in which he now lives or prefers to buy an old house and modernize to his own desires and needs. Previously I have cited figures showing the large number of old homes still used in some form or another. They offer a great opportunity to give every person a satisfactory roof over the head of his family. And finally may I implore each of you on this committee to consider throughout the next 12 months the possibility of establishing the Federal Housing Administration as a permanent Government agency. They have, as you know, paid their own way, have not cost the Government one red cent. Why, I ask, should you be compelled from time to time to reestablish this great Government friend to the homeowner on a temporary basis. Extend greater credit opportunity to the homeowner of the United States, and I pledge you the finest cooperation from the home-improvement contractors in an effort to cheaply and effectively do as President Eisenhower has indicated to our association in a letter dated March 18, 1954, "a goal of a decent home for every American family." HOMER W. CAPEHART, DOYLESTOWN, PA., March 24, 1954. Chairman, Senate Banking and Currency Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Thousands of applications available in every region of the country if the same FHA privileges are accorded to rural housing which demonstrated its stability down through the years. Centralization is a national trend which will and must continue. FHA liberalization could lend valuable assistance. Appreciate your cooperation. CHARLES J. HAPP, President, National Institute of Farm Brokers. Senator ALLEN S. ELLENDER, United States Senate: NEW ORLEANS, LA., March 9, 1954. We urge your support of National Housing Act. Suggest all title I loans be discounted in full amount at 5 percent. All title II loans should bear prevailing market interest rate. Particularly urge support section 414 of amendment as New Orleans is pilot city. Suggest consult mayor on title IV, title V, title VII, title VIII. Do not concern our rehabilitation program. CLIFFORD F. FAVROT, Chairman, New Orleans Housing Improvement Committee. Subject: Senate bill 2938 OHIO PLANNING CONFERENCE, COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIRS: The Ohio planning conference representing 350 planners and lay citizens in the State of Ohio hereby submit a statement of approval of the comprehensive-planning principles embodied in Senate bill 2938. The Ohio planning conference is a statewide association of civic-minded laymen, public officials, and planning technicians who have joined forces to promote the best interests of all Ohioans in the following fields: (1) Community and regional planning; (2) better housing; (3) urban redevelopment; (4) resource conservation. We would like the committee to be informed on the following: We commend the principle found throughout the housing bill of 1954 which recognizes that the main purpose of comprehensive local planning is to provide better communities. We further commend the requirement that Federal financial assistance for specific community improvements such as urban renewal, special FHA loans, and advance planning of public works shall be available only when these items are in conformity with the locality's comprehensive plans. We commend section 701 which will provide financial assistance to State, regional, and metropolitan planning bodies. The recent rapid growth of urban areas has found many localities in need of additional comprehensive planning. Section 701 will provide the stimulus necessary to effectuate the sound growth |