Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

In summary, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, the National Association of Counties urgently requests consideration of our amendments which would help insure the following:

1. Statutory protection within the formula allocation of community development funds allowing counties over 50,000 in population as is now provided for cities over 50,000;

2. The same "Hold Harmless" provision for counties over 50,000 in population as is now provided for metropolitan cities;

3. That counties over 50,000 in population be allowed to receive 701 planning funds directly from HUD; and

4. That 701 planning funds allocated to regional voluntary planning organizations be authorized for planning and coordination of regional comprehensive plans, but not for implementation of such plans.

Thank you once again for the opportunity to appear before you.
SUMMARY OF COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

[blocks in formation]

10. Broward, Fla...

11. Dade, Fla..

12. Orange, Fla..

13. Polk, Fla.

14. De Kalb, Ga.

620, 100

15,861

15, 881

187,890
(1)
6,520

42,000

(5)

[blocks in formation]

140,000 18,500,000

[blocks in formation]

15. Fulton, Ga

607, 592

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

17. Jefferson, Ky.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

18. Jefferson, La.

[blocks in formation]

19. Baltimore County, Md.

621, 077

8,553

20. Montgomery, Md..

[blocks in formation]

5,159

1,943, 617

21. Norfolk, Mass..

605, 051

200,000

[blocks in formation]

1,067, 565

2,988, 000

2,800,000
35,000

10, 000, 000

948, 000 7,000,000 5, 196, 868 10, 338, 000 3, 000, 000 698, 860 5,418, 460

748, 900 4, 165, 000 3, 621, 165

510,000
10, 730, 188
15, 410, 744
2,202, 000
918, 075

8, 100, 000
500,000

375,000 5,000,000

14,595, 233

300,000 350,000 12,500,000

224, 516. 2,775,000 1,887, 100 1,000,000 5,040, 000 1,682, 500

2, 800, 000

4,500,000 4, 000, 000 1,500,000

10, 000, 000 1, 163, 495 5,600,000 3, 000, 000

600,000 2,000,000 2, 000, 000 3,500,000 3,500,000 500,000 11, 000, 000 3,293,744 2,276, 050

3, 397, 519 9,500,000 1,550,000 6, 400, 000

76, 133, 000

1 Poverty-number of families with incomes under $3,000.

2 Overcrowding number of units with more than 1 person per room.

& Programs consolidated-urban renewal, neighborhood development, water and sewer, open space, public facility

[blocks in formation]

The CHAIRMAN. The next witness will be Mr. Richard Millman.

STATEMENT OF RICHARD M. MILLMAN, COUNSEL FOR HOUSING TO THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF SENIOR CITIZENS; ACCOMPANIED BY FRANK ZELENKA OF AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF HOMES FOR THE AGED; AND LAURENCE LANE OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED PERSONS

Mr. MILLMAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear and I too have a prepared statement which I would like to submit for the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered and you may also extend your remarks when you get through if something else occurs to you.

Mr. MILLMAN. Thank you. At the outset I wish to correct an embarrassing error in the very first line of my presentation, the written presentation. I had instructed my secretary to type an introduction which read, "Mr. Chairman and members of this singularly important committee," which I believe this committee to be, and it turned out to be select committee. Unfortunately, it was an oversight at 2 in the morning. Having been invited to testify yesterday we didn't have much time to get our statement together. But I apologize for that error.

I would like to first indicate that accompanying me here today seated behind me to my right, to your left, Mr. Zelenka of the American Association of Homes for the Aged, to my left and to your right, Mr. Laurence Lane of the American Association of Retired Persons.

As for myself, I am the counsel for housing matters to the National Council of Senior Citizens.

The National Council of Senior Citizens represents about 4 million. or more senior citizens and the American Association of Retired People, which Mr. Lane represents, likewise represents approximately 4 million. Mr. Zelenka represents the American Association of Homes for the Aged, a 1,200 member organization of agencies that are concerned with housing matters and are responsible for most of the housing for the elderly that has been constructed in this country. My remarks represent the views not only of these organizations as I just outlined them but in addition the views of numerous other agencies and organizations and individuals, and because of the shortness of time we could not reproduce that complete list but we will with the chairman's leave, introduce that into the record. Its referred to in our prepared statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Which list is this?

Mr. MILLMAN. A list of all of the organizations that subscribe to the views that I am presenting here in my testimony.

The CHAIRMAN. It doesn't include a roster of their membership?
Mr. MILLMAN. No, just the names.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the list will be included in the record.

Mr. MILLMAN. The National Conference of Catholic Charities, for example, would be one such organization.

The CHAIRMAN. I think it would be very appropriate.

Mr. MILLMAN. Now, I think it would be best to understand the framework in which we have approached the pending legislation by a few very salient statistics. The seniors of this country number approximately 20 million, or approximately 10 percent of the population. Assuming that their housing needs are at the level they were in 1968, which were the figures we worked from last night, and assuming costs as they exist in 1972, it will take approximately 180 years to meet the housing needs of the elderly as they existed in 1968 under present. appropriations. The situation is much worse today, it's getting worse. We have a crisis on our hands, a national crisis.

We have 6 million citizens, elderly citizens in delapidated or substandard homes. We have 5 million of our elderly below the poverty level. With those facts in mind, I have approached, as my colleagues have, the pending legislation and we have certain recommendations and I will try to get to the recommendations directly.

First, recognizing the immediate need in the crisis, we suggest, consistent with the recommendations of the White House Conference on Aging, a 25-percent set-aside, an earmarking of 25 percent of funds for housing to go to senior housing.

Second, at slight variance with the proposal in the draft legislation, and recognizing the need, we recognize and urge that 60 percent be a floor for rent supplement. By that we mean there must be established priorities***that 60 percent, or three out of every five units, should be filled with individual seniors who are of the class that is entitled to rent supplement. There is no other way to meet their housing needs.

Third, we must recognize that senior housing costs substantially more than nonaged typed housing. Architectural barriers must be removed, safety considerations, mobility considerations. The best evidence that we have is that such housing costs in excess of one-third more than nonaged housing. Hence we recommend 135-percent prototype cost with respect to senior housing as opposed to nonaged housing.

Fourth, we recommend the expansion of facilities. Housing for elderly cannot just be brick and mortar, it must be a living environment. We must have common facilities. We must gear these facilities to the medical needs, the nursing care needs, the nutritional needs and the recreation needs of the seniors, not only those who live in the multifamily structure but for the community needs of those who are in the community, not in the structure. Those are outreach facilities.

Again our recommendations are consistent with the White House Conference recommendations.

Fifth, so that we no longer face a period of bureaucratic inaction, we ask that the legislation mandate that the Department of Housing and Urban Development issue guidelines within 90 days from the enactment of this legislation so that all may see actually how the legislative intents will be translated into action by the responsible department.

Next, there is in the draft legislation a provision for the recapture of 202 funds by application of 25 percent of the funds appropriated for 236, now 502. I suggest there is no reason for that provision. The 236 funds to be appropriated, we believe should be used for new units. Since there is no provision for utilization of the recaptured retired 202 funds, what purpose does it serve for using and authorizing the use of the new appropriations to retire old existing loans that are being retired on

time. Not to use new appropriations to generate new units of housing is a misuse of scarce dollars which must go into new units.

Next, we applaud the retention of both 202 and 236 in the legislation. We recognize the $150 million level of appropriations increase that the subcommittee introduced. We think that both the 236, which is now 502, as modified by the recommendations that we set forth, will serve the needs of the elderly and offer an adaptability for the very special needs that they have.

Next, we strongly urge the establishment of a position, to wit, an Assistant Secretary for Elderly Housing and related programs. An Assistant to the Secretary does not do justice to the crisis situation that exists. We must have a position that is more visible, one that clearly recognizes that this Congress stands squarely with those seniors who have so desperate a need for housing and gives them a position which dignifies their position in this country.

Finally, we strongly urge that the provision which I can only best phrase as a veto provision, given to local authorities, over the placement, selection, and so forth, of housing units be removed from the legislation. Congress has stated repeatedly that housing is a national Federal goal and responsibility. I suggest that this responsibility ought to be retained in the hands of the Federal Congress. Presently, every deference is given to local authorities for input. No unit can be built without local input in terms of building requirements, zoning requirements, health requirements, and today, in view of A-95 the Office of Management and Budget circular, local views as to environmental impact must also be taken into consideration.

There are but some of our concerns but these are concerns which I might say have kind of bipartisan support. Basically, the amendments to 236 are the Senator Cranston amendments and the Assistant Secretary is Senator Perry's amendment while Senator Williams recommended the appropriations for 202.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.

Mr. MILLMAN. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. And you will be available for questioning after the

next witness?

Mr. MILLMAN. Yes, sir.

(Mr. Millman's prepared statement follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD M. MILLMAN, COUNSEL FOR HOUSING TO THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF SENIOR CITIZENS

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: I want at the outset to enumerate the eight (8) concerns which are jointly shared by the NCSC, the AAHA, the AARP, and the NRTA. We are joined in our concerns and statements by the individuals and organizations whose names are appended to these remarks. Our eight concerns are:

(1) That allowance be made in authorized prototype costs for the higher persquare-foot costs which sponsors require if they are to properly satisfy the special housing needs of the elderly;

(2) That local authorities not be permitted to thwart the national desire to meet the critical need of the elderly for proper housing;

(3) That a continuing effort to meet the critical need of the elderly for housing be assured by earmarking specific minimum amounts of appropriations for this purpose:

(4) That the inability of the low income elderly to afford basic rental charges be overcome by sufficient rent supplements;

(5) That the ability of communities to provide necessary as well as desirable services to those elderly who reside in dwellings other than multi-family housing be enhanced by enabling housing facilities for the elderly to provide out-reach services;

(6) That the special needs which elderly occupants of multi-family housing facilities have for recreation, nutrition, medical and nursing care be recognized and satisfied by enabling such multi-family housing facilities to provide a range of such services in addition to that of shelter;

(7) That conflicting interpretations of congressional intent relative to programs of housing for the elderly be eliminated;

(8) That the national interest and will be to meet the critical need which the elderly have for proper housing which the Congress has reflected by providing programs of housing for the elderly be further advanced by providing within the Department of Housing and Urban Development an Assistant Secretary for Housing for the Elderly.

In an effort to realize these concerns, we have prepared four recommendations which suggest changes to be made in the draft legislation proposed by this Committee's Subcommittee on Housing. These recommendations are:

RECOMMENDATION 1

On Page 11 of the draft legislation prepared by the Subcommittee on Housing. delete lines 2 and 3 and insert in lieu thereof the following:

"construction costs of new dwelling units (including units designed for the elderly and the handicapped) of various sizes and..."

[ocr errors]

Rationale: This recommendation is made in order to grant the Secretary the authority to establish the higher prototype costs which are generated by the special housing needs which the elderly and handicapped families have. At the present time, there exists considerable confusion regarding the Secretary's authority to establish more than one prototype costs for Section 236 housing. As you know, Section 236 provides housing for low and moderate income families. These categories of families have differing housing needs which generate different kinds of structures. Hence, there is need for more than one prototype costs.

RECOMMENDATION 2

On Page 49 of the draft bill prepared by the Subcommittee on Housing begin ning with line 20 strike the following words:

"No assistance payments with respect to any project shall be made under this section (and no mortgage covering any project shall be insured under subsection (i) unless the governing body of the locality where such project would be situated has by resolution specifically approved it."

Rationale: If this Committee reports a bill which includes this provision, then inevitably the achievement of Congressional declaration of housing policy to wit that "Congress affirms the national goal of a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family" will be made contingent upon the changing complexion and composition of local governing bodies. The desperate need for housing should not be subject to such changing winds. We can and do sympathize with the desire to provide for in-put on the part of local authorities. However, sufficient and proper instruments already exist which afford ample in-put by and protection to local government: HUD regulations and local laws require compliance with local zoning provisions; (2) local laws prohibit construction without prior receipt of building permits; (3) local laws require licensing prior to occupancy and operation; and (4) OMB Circular A-95 requires appropriate regional, state, and local agencies to report their views relative to any proposed multi-family housing project.

RECOMMENDATION 3

On Page 54 of the draft bill prepared by the Subcommittee on Housing, delete lines 24 and 25; and on Page 55, delete lines 1-23 and insert in lieu thereof the following:

“(5) (A) Not less than 25 per centum of the total amount of assistance payments authorized to be contracted to be made pursuant to appropriation Acts as provided in subsection (h) (after the date of the enactment of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1972) shall be contracted to be made with respect to projects which provide housing primarily for the elderly.

1 Amended section is italic.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »