Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

committee falls short of need in our estimation. We do urge full recognition of this serious problem and the provision of at least the full amount called for in the bill as it passed the Senate.

We commend to your serious attention the provision for housing for the aged of 50,000 units as a part of the above program. In addition we believe that all public housing should be available to single persons as well as family units. For additional information we attach our resolution on urban renewal.

URBAN RENEWAL AND HOUSING

It is the firm conviction of the National Federation of Settlements and Neighborhood Centers that the concept of urban renewal is a realizable goal. It envisages a total program to remake our communities so that all the factors essential to good family life are available to every American family.

It is also our conviction and faith that this, the greatest, richest, and most productive Nation in the world, can find the techniques and methods necessary to create sound communities, through the elimination of blighted areas and the rehabilitation of deteriorating neighborhoods. This takes the financial participation of the local, State, and Federal governments in order to make necessary subsidies available.

We see the need for a supply of housing of adequate standards for people of all incomes and especially for minority groups, large families, and the aged. We believe that the Housing Act of 1954, with its criteria for a workable urban renewal program is a good measure. However, to be effective, we believe the following points should be strengthened:

1. Comprehensive planning. For local neighborhoods, cities, and metropolitan areas which include adequate open space, recreational facilities, lower population densities, and the replacing of streets and highways.

2. Relocation of families.-As an essential municipal service which will have a proper regard for the welfare of people.

3. Codes and ordinances.-Effectively enforced, which will insure a safe and decent standard of living.

4. Social planning and citizen participation. To go hand in hand with technical and physical planning to insure the voice and partnership of people in neighborhoods.

5. Personnel and staffing.—Each city should include on its staff adequate numbers of trained and experienced personnel in such fields as social work, social psychology, social economy, community organization to create and to enable workable structure and meaningful democratic citizen participation.

The National Federation of Settlements and Neighborhood Centers believes that at least 2 million new housing units are needed annually. Of this number, 200,000 should be public housing units. We believe this to be the minimum program essential to provide for those now ill housed and to provide for an enlarged population.

Hon. EDGAR W. HIESTAND,

LOS ANGELES, CALIF., June 10, 1955.

House Office Building, Washington, D. C.:

Please insert this telegraphic statement in the Banking and Currency Committee housing bill hearings.

We protest inclusion in any amendment to the Housing Act of any of the provisions of title II—Public Facility Loans, and title III-College Housing, of S. 2126 recently passed by the Senate.

The investment banking industry can and has been and is supplying annually billions of dollars to public bodies for public works and there is no existing demand that is sound that cannot be met.

We believe authorization of funds proposed to be loaned at arbitrarily low interest rates constitutes unjustifiable interference with private industry.

We do not believe the provisions of title II-Public Facility Loans, have any place in any public housing bill and we concur with the testimony of the American Council on Education and others that the provisions of title III-College Housing, should not be expanded to include union buildings, etc., not directly related to housing. We concur with Federal Housing Administrator Cole that no additional legislation is needed at this time. We believe that liberalization of direct loans by Congress is unwarranted and unsound and will force private industry out of the

field. We recommend that general considerations of aid to public bodies and colleges be referred to appropriate committee and not brought in the back door as part of a program of assistance to residential construction.

[blocks in formation]

DEAR MR. REPRESENTATIVE: I am the chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Federal Housing Administration, Section 213 Cooperatives, and I am vastly interested in the current hearings regarding the new cooperative housing law. Our group represents the completed Section 213 Cooperatives and though our main efforts are directed in the area of the problems of those presently organized cooperative housing groups, we are also concerned with the future of cooperative housing in this country.

We have noted that very little building has been done under the present cooperative housing law. We feel that cognizance must be taken of the fact that the impetus for this type of building comes mainly from builder/sponsor groups. We realize that there were many abuses practiced under prior laws, and I testified before the Senate Banking and Finance Committee in August of 1954, and outlined these abuses.

However, we do feel that certain changes can be made in the present law, which will incorporate safeguards for the buying public and yet have the effect of attracting builder/sponsor groups to this program.

Some of these changes would include:

(1) A reassessment of the formula for determining construction costs. It is imperative that the formula be changed from estimated value to replacement cost.

(2) An increase in the maximum amount of allowable mortgage commitment to the Federal Housing Administration.

(3) Some regulatory legislation, providing for an independent group to represent the buying public from the outset.

If these three suggestions are incorporated into the new law, I feel that our purposes of furthering additional cooperative housing and providing the necessary safeguards, will be accomplished.

I have written directly to the Federal Housing Administration, outlining the details of suggestion No. 3, and I would be very happy to discuss these proposals directly wih you or your representative, at any time.

Respectfully yours,

LEIGH M. MEDINE, Chairman.

DALLAS, TEX., June 8, 1955.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

Member of Congress, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: Believe titles 2 and 3 of S. 2126 now before House Banking and Currency Committee entirely unwarranted and unnecessary and I vigorously protest. Please include this protest in record.

LOUIS W. STAYART.

DALLAS, TEX., June 8, 1955.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

Member of Congress, Washington, D. C.:

We oppose strongly titles 2 and 3 of S. 2126 same being an encroachment on private industry. Request this protest be included in committee record.

C. N. BURT Co.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.:

DALLAS, TEX., June 8, 1955.

We desire to register our most strenuous opposition to titles II and III of S. 2126 which we consider to be an unwarranted encroachment on private enterprise. We request that this protest be included in the record.

CENTRAL INVESTMENT COMPANY OF TEXAS, By EUGENE D. VINYARD.

DALLAS, TEX., June 8, 1955.

JOHN J. BELL,

Member of Congress, Washington, D. C.:

We violently oppose passage S. 2126 particularly title 2 and title 3 believing same to be an encroachment on private enterprise and request that this protest be included in the committee record.

THE COLUMBIAN SECURITIES CORP.

DALLAS, TEX., June 8, 1955.

JOHN J. BELL,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.:

I feel that private capital can finance all legitimate municipal and college financing in the country and urge you to vote against Senate bill 2126 when it comes before your committee and would appreciate my protest being placed in the record.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

CHAS. C. PIERCE.

HOUSTON, TEX., June 9, 1955.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: We request that you insert this statement in the Banking and Currency Committee housing bill report on hearings. We strongly oppose any inclusion in housing amendments act of the provisions of title III, College Housing of S. 2126 now before you. We believe direct loans by Government unsound financing especially at arbitrarily and unreasonably low interest rates and suggest present trend will lead eventually to billions of financing for colleges as it will force private industry out of the field. We believe the expansion of the program into fields other than housing such as student unions and infirmaries goes far beyond any program of assistance to residential construction and should be considered as a general program of aid to education at the college level by the appropriate committee. We call attention to testimony before Senate Subcommittee on behalf of American Council on Education and others that the college housing program was conceived to encourage provision of low-cost housing and that they themselves agreed with Administrator Cole that the program should be restricted to the housing field, since Administrator Cole states he knows of no needed legislation and since a program is now operating with a large unreleased and uncommitted balance of more than $100 million we believe it infinitely better to defer action until next year meanwhile giving mature consideration to other solutions such as a strong insurance feature which would help college housing and accomplish the desired aims with the use of the large private funds available at reasonable rates of interest and consequently lessen the pressure to encumber Federal funds.

COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY FINANCE ASSOCIATES
OF SAN ANTONIO, TEX.

By E. S. EMERSON.

HOUSTON, TEX., June 8, 1955.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

Washington, D. C.:

Please insert this telegraphic statement in the Banking and Currency Committee Housing bill hearings report. We protest inclusion in any amendment to the housing act of any of the provisions of title II-Public Facility Loans and title III-College Housing, of S. 2126 recently passed by the Senate. The investment banking industry can and has been and is supplying annually billions of dollars to public bodies for public works and there is no existing demand that is sound

that cannot be met. We believe authorization of funds proposed to be loaned at arbitrarily low interest rates constitutes unjustifiable interference with private industry. We do not believe the provisions of title II-Public Facility Loans have any place in any public housing bill and we concur with the testimony of the American Council on Education and others that the provisions of title III-College Housing should not be expanded to include union buildings, etc., not directly related to housing. We concur with Federal Housing Administrator Cole that no additional legislation is needed at this time. We believe that liberalization of direct loans by Congress is unwarranted and unsound and will force private industry out of the field. We recommend that general considerations of aid to public bodies and colleges be referred to appropriate committee and not brought in the back door as part of a program of assistance to residential construction.

W. E. Knickerbocker, C. C. McClung, Robert E. Moroney, Ott U.
Wymer, Wilbur Frederking, R. G. Wills, R. N. Eddleman, Lewis
W. Pollok, Earl G. Fridley, Wilbur E. Hess, J. Wylie Harris,
Ernest L. Brown, Jr., Lewis M. Lamaster, Lawrence Davis,
Francis I. Abshire, J. R. Phillips, Jr., E. C. Hawkins, Edward
Rotan, J. L. Mosle, Russell R. Bowles, A. E. Goodwin, Jr., William
J. Shawell, Milton R. Underwood, Dana T. Richardson, Chas. B.
White, Joseph R. Neuhaus, Philip R. Neuhaus, Neill T. Masterson,
Jr., Lovett Abercrombie.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL, M. C.,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C.:

DALLAS, TEX., June 9, 1955.

We earnestly solicit your active opposition to titles II and III of S. 2126 rassed by the Senate last Tuesday and which we understand is now before your committee. We consider this legislation dangerous and unnecessary and if implemented would undoubtedly constitute unfair interference with private industry and place the Government in the loan business on an unprecedented scale.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

Capitol Building, Washington, D. C.:

WILMER LEE MOORE,
J. ERVIN SHILG.

SAN ANTONIO, TEX., June 9, 1955.

I wish to have placed on record my protest against Senate bill 2126 as I feel this is putting the Government back into private business.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.:

LOUIS J. KOCUREK.

DALLAS, TEX., June 9, 1955.

As underwriters of municipal bonds we vigorously protest titles 2 and 3 Senate bill 2126. If passed, this bill will allow municipalities to borrow money from the Federal Government at lower interest rates than can be obtained by the Federal Government itself for comparable year of maturities. Such rates are completely unjustified for municipalities with populations of 10,000 or less. We request that this protest be made a part of the record of the committee hearings. Respectfully yours,

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

House of Representatives, Washington D. C.:

DITTMAR & Co., Investment Bankers.

AUSTIN, TEX., June 9, 1955.

We protest titles 2 and 3 of S. 2126 as an encroachment on private industry. Urge you include our protest in the record of the hearing in the Banking and Currency Committee.

JAMES C. TUCKER & CO., INC., Investment Dealers.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

House of Representatives, Washington D. C.:

DALLAS, TEX., June 9, 1955.

We desire to register our most strenuous objection to titles II and III of S. 2126 which we consider to be an encrochment on private enterprise. We request that this protest be included in the record.

JOHN BELL,

FIRST SOUTHWEST Co., WM. P. SMALLWOOD. DALLAS, TEX., June 9, 1955.

Member House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: Understand S. 2126 covering revision of titles 2 and 3 housing legislation now under consideration in committee and I wash to register opposition to this bill as unnecessary and competing with private financing. Further request this message be made part of record in committee report.

LOCKETT SHELTON,

Vice President, Republic National Bank of Dallas.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

DALLAS, TEX., June 9, 1955.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.:

Re titles 2 and 3 of Senate bill 2126 I wish to firmly protest passage of subject bill inasmuch as I feel that this is an encroachment upon private enterprise and prejudices the freedom that has made us the greatest country in the world. Please make this protest a part of the official record. Respectfully submitted.

R. J. EDWARDS, INC.

B. H. ESTES, Resident Manager.

DALLAS, TEX., June 9, 1955.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.:

Urgently recommend defeat of S. 2126 giving undue power to Federal Government and representing encroachment upon private facilities for financing improvements in cities and colleges. Request this wire be made part of record of House Banking and Currency Committee.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.:

HENRY-SEAY & Co.
W. H. SEAY.

DALLAS, TEX., June 9, 1955.

We are opposed to the inclusion of titles II and III in S. 2126 because the 24percent maximum is unrealistic in today's money market. We request that this protest be included in the record.

ROBERT F. TEMPLE,

Manager, Bond Department, Southwestern Securities Co.

Hon. JOHN J. BELL,

DALLAS, TEX., June 9, 1955.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.:

As underwriters of municipal bonds, we strongly protest titles II and III of Senate bill 2126 which, if passed, will allow municipalities to borrow money from the Federal Government at interest rates which are lower than the Federal Government borrowing rates, and are completely unjustified in view of current interest rates for municipalities with populations of 10,000 or less. We request that this protest be made a part of the record of the committee hearings.

DALLAS RUPE & SON, INC.,
Investment Bankers.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »