(4) "Metropolitan area" would mean a standard metropolitan statistical area as established by the Office of Management and Budget; (5) "Metropolitan city" would mean a city having a population of 50,000 or more or a central city in a metropolitan area;

(6) "Urban county" would mean any county which is within a metropolitan area and which has a population of 200,000 or more, excluding the population of metropolitan cities therein;

(7) "Population" would mean total resident population based on data compiled by the United States Bureau of the Census and referable to the same point or period in time;

(8) "Extent of poverty" would mean the number of persons whose incomes are below the poverty level, as determined by the Secretary pursuant to the definition provided by the Office of Management and Budget, and based on data referable to the same point or period in time;

(9) "Extent of housing overcrowding" would mean the number of housing units with 1.01 or more persons per room based on data compiled by the United States Bureau of the Census and referable to the same point or period in time; and

(10) "Fiscal year" would mean that period of time extending from July 1 of any calendar year through June 30 of the subsequent calendar year and receiving the numerical designation of the calendar year in which the period ends.

Subsection (b) would provide that to the extent practicable, the definitions in subsection (a) must be based upon the most recent data compiled by the United States Bureau of the Census and the latest published circulars of the Office of Management and Budget. The Secretary would be authorized to make technical modifications in the terms defined in subsection (a) by regulation where necessary to reflect modifications in Bureau of the Census data categories made subsequent to enactment of the Act.

Section 4. Community development activities eligible for assistance This section would set forth the community development activities for which shared Federal revenues provided under this Act may be used.

These activities may include:

(1) acquisition of real property (including interests therein) which is blighted or inappropriately developed, needed for public or community facilities, historic preservation, beautification, conservation, recreation, the guidance of urban development, or for other public purposes;

(2) relocation payments and assistance for those displaced by community development activities;

(3) clearance, demolition, removal, and rehabilitation of buildings and improvements (including financing rehabilitation of privately owned properties when incidental to other activities);

(4) provision of public works, facilities, and sites or other improvements;

(5) elimination, by code enforcement and other means, of harmful physical conditions constituting a danger to public health and safety; (6) disposition (by sale, lease, donation, or otherwise) of acquired real property or its retention for public purposes; and

(7) the provision of community services (including activities to further the purposes of section 9(a)) which the recipient determines are necessary to achieve its community development objectives. Section 5. Statement of community development objectives

Subsection (a) would provide that prior to first receipt in any fiscal year of funds by any State or by any unit of general local government under Section 7, the recipient of such funds is required to have prepared a final statement of community development objectives and projected use of funds for such fiscal year. In order to permit public examination and appraisal of community development projects and activities and to facilitate coordination of activities with different levels of government, at least 60 days prior to preparation of a final statement, a recipient must publish a proposed statement in such manner as to afford the citizens of such State or such unit of general local government a reasonable opportunity to examine its content and to submit comments on the proposed statement. In preparing its final statement the recipient would have to consider any such comments and may, if deemed appropriate by the recipient, modify the proposed statement. A recipient's statement must reflect the degree to which activities assisted under this Act relate to any State and area wide programs and activities for community development. Every final statement of community development objectives and projected use of funds must be made available to the public, and a copy must be furnished to the Secretary (and, in the case of any recipient unit of general local government, to the Governor of the State in which it is located as well) together with a certification that the recipient is in full compliance with the publication requirements of this subsection as well as the other provisions of the Act.

Subsection (b) would provide that with respect to funds received in fiscal year 1975, the requirements of subsection (a) may be met by actions taken prior to the effective date of this Act.

Subsection (c) would provide that within 60 days after the close of any fiscal year in which the recipient receives funds under this Act, it must make public and forward to the Secretary a report concerning the community development projects or activities paid for or expected to be paid for in whole or in part by funds received under Section 7 which were initiated or carried out during the preceding fiscal year. The report must include an assessment of such activities in relation to the community's development objectives.

Section 6. Authorization of appropriations

This section would authorize to be appropriated without fiscal year limitation such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 1975 and the four succeeding fiscal years.

Section 7. Allocation and distribution of funds

Subsection (a) would provide for payments by the Secretary to metropolitan cities and urban counties as follows:

(1) From the funds provided in any fiscal year from appropriations to carry out this Act, the Secretary would be required to pay to each metropolitan city and urban county an aggregate amount equal to the greater of its formula entitlement, subject to a phase in adjust

ment, as computed under (2), or its hold-harmless amount as computed under (3).

(2) The Secretary would be required to compute the formula entitlement of each metropolitan city or urban county by allocating 65 per cent of the total of the funds made available in each fiscal year from appropriations to carry out this Act so that each metropolitan city or urban county is allocated an amount which bears the same ratio to such 65 per cent of the total of the funds made available in each fiscal year as the average of ratios among (1) the population of the city or urban county and that of all metropolitan cities and urban counties, (2) the extent of poverty in the city or urban county and that in all metropolitan cities and urban counties (counted twice), and (3) the extent of housing overcrowding in the city or urban county and that in all metropolitan cities and urban counties. In computing the entitlement of urban counties the Secretary would be required to exclude population, poverty, and housing overcrowding data which are derived from metropolitan cities located within such counties. In addition, in computing entitlement for fiscal years 1975 and 1976, the Secretary would be required to exclude population, poverty, and housing overcrowding data which are derived from units of general local government located within any urban county and which qualify for hold-harmless funds. For fiscal year 1977, he would be required to exclude two-thirds of such data and for fiscal year 1978, he would be required to exclude one-third of such data.

Some metropolitan cities and urban counties would be allotted considerably more funds under this needs formula than these communities have received in past years from participation in the categorical programs being replaced by this Act. Formula entitlements would be adjusted in the case of metropolitan cities and urban counties having formula entitlements which are more than their hold-harmless amount as determined under (3). During the first three years for which funds are allocated under this Act, the entitlement of such metropolitan cities or urban counties would be subject to an adjustment so that (1) the entitlement for the first year equals one-third of the full entitlement, or the hold-harmless amount, whichever is the greater, (2) the entitlement for the second year equals two-thirds of the full entitlement, or the hold-harmless amount, or the amount allowed under clause (1) whichever is the greatest, and (3) the entitlement for the third year equals the full formula entitlement.

(3) Each metropolitan city or urban county would be guaranteed a hold-harmless amount computed on the basis of prior grants or other assistance the city or county has received as a result of its participation in categorical grant programs being replaced by this Act. The full hold-harmless amount for each metropolitan city or urban county would be made up of the sum of (i) the sum of the average during the five fiscal years ending prior to July 1, 1972 of (1) commitments for grants which the city or county has received under the urban renewal program (part A of title I of the Housing Act of 1949), (2) loans under the rehabilitation loan program (section 312 of the Housing Act of 1964), (3) grants under the basic water and sewer facilities and neighborhood facilities programs (sections 702

and 703 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965), (4) loans under the public facilities loan program (title II of the Housing Act of 1955), and (5) grants under the open space land program (title VII of the Housing Act of 1961); and (ii) the average annual neighborhood development grant (Part B of title I of the Housing Act of 1949) made during fiscal years ending prior to July 1, 1972, or during fiscal year 1973 in the case of a metropolitan city or urban county which first received a neighborhood development grant in such fiscal year. In the case of metropolitan cities and urban counties which have been participating in the model cities program the hold-harmless amount would be increased on the basis of their model cities experience. The amount of additional hold-harmless would be the amount of the average annual grant (excluding grants made for Planned Variations) made to these communities pursuant to section 105 of the Model Cities Act during fiscal years ending prior to July 1, 1972. This additional amount would be credited however only for a period that permits the community a five year combination of model cities funding years and hold-harmless additions. The amount of the average annual grant resulting from participation in the model cities or NDP programs would be established by taking the total dollar amount of the grants made to a participant under the program, dividing by the number of months for which those grants were authorized and multiplying the result by twelve.

Grants or loans made to assist in recovery from natural disasters, and grants made to assist in the initial implementation of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act would be excluded when determining hold-harmless amounts. In addition, for the purpose of determining the hold-harmless amount in the case of urban counties, the Secretary would be required to exclude grants or other assistance extended to metropolitan cities and other units of local government within those counties.

During fiscal years 1975 and 1976, the hold-harmless amount for each metropolitan city or urban county would be the full hold-harmless amount computed for the city or county. The hold-harmless provision would begin to be phased out after fiscal year 1976. In fiscal years 1977 and 1978, if the hold harmless amount is greater than the formula entitlement of the metropolitan city or urban county for that year, it would have to be reduced so that in fiscal year 1977 the excess of holdharmless over the formula entitlement would equal two-thirds of the difference between the full hold-harmless computation and the formula entitlement for such year, and so that in fiscal year 1978 the excess of hold-harmless over the formula entitlement would be equal to one-third of the difference between the full hold-harmless amount of the formula entitlement for such year. After fiscal year 1978, there would be no hold-harmless amount.

Subsection (b) would provide hold-harmless payments to a unit of general local government which is not a metropolitan city or urban county if it was participating in the model cities program on June 30, 1974, or if during fiscal year 1968 or any subsequent fiscal years preceding the date of enactment of this Act it was carrying out urban renewal or neighborhood development programs pursuant to grants and commitments for grants entered into during that period.

Subsection (c) would provide that of the funds available from appropriations to carry out this Act that are not paid in any fiscal year to metropolitan cities, urban counties or other units of general local government under subsection (a) or (b) (but not including funds that become available in fiscal year 1977 and subsequent fiscal years solely by virtue of the phase out of hold-harmless) the Secretary would allocate 90 per cent of such funds for use by States for community development purposes.

The Secretary would be required to allot such funds to the States on the basis of the relative needs of metropolitan areas in the States. The factors used in establishing need would be population, poverty (counted twice) and housing overcrowding. For the purpose of determining the amount to be allocated to each State under this subsection, metropolitan areas would be considered as though they did not include metropolitan cities.

To receive funds under this subsection (c) a State would have to certify through its governor that in the distribution or use of funds allocated to the States among different metropolitan areas in the State, each of its metropolitan areas will receive at least 50 per cent of the amount of the State's allocation which is attributable to inclusion in the allocation formula of data pertaining to that metropolitan area without any deduction for State administrative costs. Funds not allocated and used in or made available to particular metropolitan areas as required in the preceding sentence would be available for distribution by the governor to units of general local government in the State and, in reasonable amounts, for State expenses in carrying out the Act.

Subsection (d) would provide that any funds not allocated and used under any preceding subsection or which are allotted but not paid pursuant to subsection (e) (2) of this section would be available to the Secretary for payments to states and units of general local government subject to such terms and conditions as he may prescribe or for such other uses as he determines would be consistent with the purposes of the Act including evaluation, directly or by contract or otherwise, of the use of shared revenues disbursed under this Act.

Subsection (e) would provide that funds which become available in fiscal year 1977 and subsequent fiscal years by virtue of the phase out of hold-harmless would have to be allotted as follows: ten per cent of such sums would be allotted to the Secretary for use in accordance with subsection (d) of this section and the balance of such sums would be allotted so that (1) one-third is divided among metropolitan cities and urban counties in the same manner as funds are allotted to them under subparagraph (A) of subsection (a)(2), (2) one-third is divided among the States in the same manner as funds are allotted to them under subparagraph (A) of subsection (c) (2) but without regard to the exclusion of metropolitan cities required by subparagraph (B) of that subsection and this amount would be available in each State only for distribution in metropolitan areas with each metropolitan area being entitled to that amount of the State's share of these funds which is attributable to inclusion of data pertaining to its population, poverty and housing overcrowding, and (3) one-third is divided among the States in the same manner as in