(The prepared statement and attachments of Mr. Blackfield are as follows:) APPENDIX I. NAHB POSITIONS ON H.R. 9751 AND RELATED BILLS (Statement by National Association of Home Builders) TITLE I-NEW AIDS FOR DISPLACED FAMILIES AND BUSINESSES, AND ELDERLY IN URBAN RENEWAL AREAS 203. Additional relief for home mort- 205. Home improvement loans outside of urban renewal areas. 206. Mortgage limits for homes. No time for real study and thinking through of consequences. Therefore NAHB must oppose now; Congress should postpone action to permit thorough scrutiny. Same comment. But NAHB solidly opposed to extension of "prevailing wages" program; would increase land costs and make entire proposal unworkable. General approval. NAHB board rejected this proposal. NAHB opposes completely, believes unwarranted by any real standard of need and very likely to result in constant harassment of industry, FHA, and Congress. Could an insurance feature protect homeowners? General approval. There is need to aid home improvement program but we oppose cash payments on defaults. NAHB supports increase in mortgage amounts under section 203(b). NAHB supports increase in mortgage amounts under section 203 (i) but bill should be amended to raise amount to $12,000 plus a $2,000 high cost area allowance, and a 97 percent ratio on vacation homes. No objection. NAHB has a similar proposal for 221(d) (3). Support. But this reveals a basic weakness in the whole public housing program. As presently constituted, public housing does not provide for the really poor families. NAHB believes this section will not correct the underlying fault. The entire public housing program should be drastically revised or a new approach devised. No objection. NAHB generally favors responsible local Government control. NAHB opposed; also opposed to section 405. There should be a moratorium on new public housing authorization until currently authorized reservations or projects in process under agency procedures are brought into a manageable position and private housing under FHA's section 221 and other programs is given more opportunity to house lower income families. No objection. No objection. NAHB supports this program. Two projects (Tulsa and Florida projects) involve NAHB members and affiliated associations. TITLE VIII- -MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROCEDURAL AMENDMENTS 801. Time limit on FHA recoupment of 803. Changes in FHA insurance benefits and simplification of payment procedures. 804. Rehabilitation in urban renewal areas. 805. FHA section 221 housing for lowand moderate-income elderly persons. 806. Mortgage insurance for service men. NAHB supports. NAHB objects. Very much against changing FHA system and basic security of debenture issuing powers. NAHB supports. NAHB supports. NAHB supports with separate series of amendments. (See separate app. II.) NAHB supports with amendments (1) to increase maximum mortgage to $30,000, and (2) to remove 2-year time limit. (See separate app. II.) Section 807. Private financing of sale of FHAacquired properties. 808. Mortgage insurance for condominiums. 809. Transfer of funds. 810. Experimental housing mortgage insurance program. NAHB position-Comment NAHB objects to cash payments in place of debentures. The debenturesafety system should not be invaded by such amendments. NAHB supports except for application of prevailing wages, which will cause increased costs and administrative difficulties for projects built under this program. NAHB objects. This is, or could be, a weakening move, subverting the soundness of FHA's reserves and invading the mutuality of the funds. NAHB supports. NAHB research laboratory and experimental houses, plus time and motion study, all serve to highlight need for more industry experimentation and research. AMENDMENT A-CHANGED LOAN-TO-VALUE RATIOS FOR SECTION 203 Explanation Section 206(a) of H.R. 9751 raises the maximum mortgage limits under the FHA section 203 sales housing program. This will bring its total loan limits up to date but does little to improve the downpayment schedules in the upper priced brackets of housing. An amendment, as suggested below, will correct this result and make the section 203 program substantially more competitive with conventional financing, and thus more useful generally to the public. Also included is a change of 2 percent for existing housing under section 203, which restores a 5-percent differential that existed prior to the Housing Act of 1959. The table which follows illustrates the changes. Suggested amendments H.R. 9751 is amended at page 30 by striking out lines 5 through 9 and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "SEC. 206(a). Section 203 (b) (2) of the National Housing Act is amended by"(1) striking out $25,000', '27,500', '27,500', and '35,000' and inserting in lieu thereof $30,000', '32,500', '32,500', and '37,500', respectively, and "(2) striking out '90', '90', and '75', and inserting in lieu thereof '92', '95', and '85', respectively." 30-150-64- --42 Present law 1 Under H.R. 9751 2 Comparison table: Top mortgage-lowest downpayment-monthly mortgage payment Under suggested amendment 3 13 percent of 1st $15,000 of value; 10 percent of next $5,000; and 25 percent of remaining value (top loan amount at $25,000). 2 Same loan-to-value and downpayment schedule-top loan amount raised to $30,000. 3 3 percent of 1st $15,000 of value; 5 percent of next $5,000; and 15 percent of remaining value (top loan amount at $30,000). Figures in table are for 35-year 5-percent mortgages with 1⁄2 percent monthly insurance premium. |