페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

(d) Shortens the term of the Comptroller General and Deputy Comptroller General from fifteen (15) to five (5) years, makes them eligible for reappointment, and provides for their removal for cause by Congress;

(e) Conforms existing provisions for Comptroller General's pension to the reduction of his term from fifteen years to five years ;

(1) Provides that the Director of OBEO shall be appointed by, and may be removed by, Congress;

(9) Requires that the Comptroller General and Deputy Comptroller General serving on the date of enactment shall be subject to appointment by

Congress within sixty days thereafter. SEC. 5: Directs OBEO to

(1) Continuously review the fiscal requirements needed to fund existing programs adequately to achieve their legislative purpose ;

(2) Within 45 days after the President submits the Budget or any legislative proposal to Congress, submit a written report to Congress evaluating

(A) the accuracy of its revenue projections ;

(B) the adequacy of proposed funding to assure full implementation of legislative programs of Congress ;

(C) the need for proposed new programs or reduction of existing programs, and whether such proposals are consistent with the legislative programs of Congress; (3) Make a full report to Congress at least twice a year on the implementation of legislative programs. SEC. 6:

(a) Prohibits the Executive from impounding moneys appropriated for any program unless the Comptroller General has first approved the impoundment (except when an impoundment under specific circumstances is expressly authorized by statute);

(0) Establishes criteria and procedures for Comptroller General's approval or disapproval of a proposed impoundment by the Executive, prohibiting approval if the impoundment is not consistent with the legislative intent of Congress concerning the program in question ;

(c) Permits Congress to override any decision by the Comptroller General concerning impoundment. SEC. 7: Requires the head of each department in the Executive to submit to OBEO a duplicate copy of each legislative and budget request submitted by him to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

SEC. 8: Empowers the GAO to issue subpoenas to obtain necessary information.

SEC. 9: Directs Comptroller General to cut off disbursements from the Treasury for expenditures which he determines are being made for purposes not consistent with the intent of Congress.

SEC. 10: Maintains all existing functions of the GAO.

SEC. 11: Authorizes such appropriations as may be necessary to carry out the Act.

SAN FRANCISCO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY,

WESTERN ADDITION SITE OFFICE,

San Francisco, Calif., January 17, 1973. Hon. ALAN CRANSTON, U.S. Senator, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR CRANSTON: Thank you for your efforts with respect to the Administration's moratorium on housing subsidies and on the issuance by the Department of Housing and Urban Development of commitments to insure mortgage loans for low and moderate income housing. As we have noted in our correspondence with your office, such a moratorium will have a disastrous effect on our City's program for housing persons of limited means.

The San Francisco area office of HUD has issued current letters of feasibility for, and has reserved rent supplement funds in connection with, 1,885 units of Redevelopment Agency assisted low and moderate income housing in San Francisco as of this date. Applications for HUD firm commitment to insure have been submitted or are being readied for the developments involved. Were the feasibility letters not to be honored or the firm commitments not forthcoming, all of these units would be lost.

Sponsors for an additional 3,000 units have expended considerable time and money on organization, architects' plans, specifications and exhibits required for submissions for feasibility. The time, effort and money spent on such preparations will also be lost, as will many if not all of the sponsoring organizations, particularly the non-profit groups, if the moratorium remains in force.

The bulk of the housing is proposed for Hunters Point, the Mission District the Western Addition, and downtown San Francisco, all of which have serious shortages of low income housing. The total estimated development cost of the 1,885 units for which feasibility has been found is in the vicinity of $100 million; the labor required is estimated at more than 7,000 man years. If the 3,000 units now in advanced stages of preparation are added, the figures are more than doubled.

Your continuing support of action on behalf of San Francisco's housing program is greatly appreciated. Sincerely,

ROBERT L. RUMSEY.

Executive Director.

[From State News (Dover, Del.), Jan. 10, 1973)

HUD RULING HALTS DELAWARE HOUSING

(By John Kennedy) Dover-Fourteen housing projects in Delaware for low- and moderate-income families have been stalled because of a U.S. Housing and Urban Development moratorium.

The halt on all new subsidized housing agreements was announced Tuesday in Houston, Tex. by HUD Secretary George Romney.

A 200-unit project scheduled for Kent County just made it under the moratorium wire, but a 50-unit project for the elderly planned by the Dorer Housing Authority was not as lucky. A proposal to renovate 144 houses in Capitol Green was also halted,

The Kent project, however, ran into other opposition in the form of the Kent County Levy Court.

Levy Court yesterday denied two proposed sites for the houses, deferred action on a third site and very reluctantly approved a fourth.

The Kent project is to be built by Wilmington developer Leon N. Weiner, Weiner was in Houston attending the National Association of Home Builders where he got into a shouting match with Romney.

According to a New York Times report, Weiner attacked the administration, saying its encouragement of housing growth is inadequate.

Romney then stalked angrily from the stage and gave Weiner a tongue-lashing for criticizing the administration's Operation Breakthrough.

The Kent project is part of Operation Breakthrough.

Robert L. Halbrook, Jr., secretary of the state Department of Community Affairs and Economic Development, fired off a telegram to Delaware's congressional dele gation.

The telegram said the housing moratorium "creates a grave crisis for thousands of Delawareans and prevents us from going forward on 928 dwelling units for low- and moderate-income families."

Halbrook told the congressmen it is urgent that they work for reconsideration of the administration's decision.

Robert S. Moyer, director of the Division of Housing, said the HUD halt will affect 422 dwelling units slated for Kent County and 278 units slated for Sussex County.

The balance of the 928 dwelling units are in New Castle County, primarily Wilmington.

The Kent project, to be located on six scattered sites, was not affected by the moratorium because it had received an executed preliminary loan project from HUD.

CITY OF BURLINGTON, IOWA,

Burlington, Iowa, January 17, 1973. Senator HAROLD HUGHES, C.S. Senate, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAB SENATOR HUGHES: The City of Burlington finds it urgently necessary to protest the recently announced HUD program moratorium. It was with surprise that Burlington learned of the most recent example of arbitrary and indiscrimiDate decision-making at the Cabinet level of the Department of HUD. It is apparent that the action taken does not consider the level of impact such negative action will have upon people, as well as programs. Unfortunately, the Secretary is irresponsibly reacting to an illusionary stack of paper that can be referred to as the "program" but he does not appear to be fully cognizant of the fact that said “program" is comprised of, and concerned with, PEOPLE.

It is for this reason that the City of Burlington urgently requests your assistance and support in opposing the HUD moratorium and its very negative impact on the people of our community. It is important to point out that 120 units of Low Rent Housing for the Elderly and 100 units of Section 23. Housing will unquestionably not be funded due to the recent "freeze.” The loss of these units has a rather long range effect upon the success of the $554,000 Neighborhood Development Program currently in execution and the ability of Burlington to adequately meet the housing needs of its elderly (14.3% of Burlington's total population). The negative effect upon the Neighborhood Development Program is of considerible concern since the loss of potential low rent Section 23 Housing will directly determine and decrease our relative ability to adequately house low income families in the 360 acre program area.

The moratorium will further affect our City by eliminating the use of the FHA Section 235 or 236 Programs to construct replacement housing in an existing two block residential redevelopment area. The inability to aggressively and expeditiously develop these two residential blocks will have a far reaching impact upon the success of the Central Burlington Neighborhood Development Program, primarily due to the blow dealt to the morale of the neighborhood residents.

To jeopardize the success of the Maple Hills Neighborhood Organization as a necessary and viable citizen organization by issuing an indiscriminate and arbitrary "freeze" is totally and unacceptably irresponsible. The City of Burlington cannot justify or condone such action when the success of citizen solidarity is at stake.

It is therefore recommended that legislative action be taken to:
(A) Determine and define the announced "temporary program freeze".

(B) Define the reference regarding the funding of programs that had reached "the feasibility approval stage”. There is no procedure that clearly fits that phrase.

(C) Determine the short and long-range status of funding for existing Neighborhood Development Programs. Particularly investigate the proposed or expected funding levels for fiscal 73–74.

(D) Determine, to the degree possible, the implied “logic" of the moratorium. What is the next step? What are the long-range plans for funding categorical grants? Is the administration attempting to force (by threat) the passage of "special revenue sharing"?

(E) Investigate and develop federal and state initiatives and programs to assist urban and rural communities in attacking their total problems not just pieces or symptoms of the problem. While special revenue may be one form of assistance to urban and rural communities, it alone will not get the job doneespecially with the meager amount of funds that will be available. There will, in the immediate future, always be a need for categorical programs, until the expertise and understanding of complex problems has been developed at the local level to adequately deal with these problems.

The staff and the Council of the City of Burlington agree that any assistance you can provide in answering the above will allow us to better inform our citizens

and perhaps maintain the level of rapport established in support of the Neigt. borhood Development Program.

We look forward to hearing from you as soon as reasonably possible. If we can be of any assistance please do not hesitate to contact George E. Howell. Director of Planning & Development at 319753-2241, ext. 22. Sincerely,

WAYNE W. HOGBERG,

Nayor.

GEORGE E. HOWELL Director, Department of Planning and Development.

HOUSING

AND

[News release, Jan. 31, 1973] REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF

MINNESOTA

SAINT PAUL,

“There are serious immediate and long range implications for Saint Paul's Neighborhood Development Program resulting from recent actions by the Va. tional Administration," revealed Orville E. Anderson, chairman of the St. Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), at an HRA Board meeting today.

These actions by the Administration include the following: recent rerisions (dated January 11, 1973) in HUD regulations; the President's recommended Budget for the Federal Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 1973 and ending June 30, 1974 (Fiscal 1974); and recommendations for programs to replace those terminated.

Anderson stressed that recent revisions of HUD regulations for NDP and other renewal projects, if rigidly interpreted, could result in a severe reduction of Federal funding for the NDP Year V program in spite of the fact that this program as submitted has the full support of the Mayor, City Council and all the affected neighborhoods. St. Paul's HRA also has the assurance of the HUT Area Office that more than $11 million will be made available subject to submission of an "acceptable" application. "What is now in doubt is what constitutes an acceptable application under the new ground rules”, he added. The HRA will be meeting soon with the Area Office Director and will urge full approval of the NDP Year V Program.

The President's recommended Budget for Fiscal 1974 indicates that as of June 30, 1973 (end of Fiscal 1973), the following community development prin grams will be terminated; Urban Renewal (including NDP), Neighborhood Facilities, Rehabilitation Loans, Public Facility Loans, Water and Sewer Facilities, Open Space Land and Model Cities. The housing production programs, including public housing and moderate-income housing (Sections 235 and 236) bare already been suspended and the public housing modernization program will also be suspended on June 30, 1973. Thus, even if NDP Year V is funded (from Jay 1, 1973 to April 30, 1974), as of April 30, 1974 the NDP Program in Saint Paul will be terminated.

Anderson said recommendations for programs to replace those terminated are not definite. There has been discussion of the so-called Community Development revenue sharing concept which might replace all these categorical aid programs, but it is evident now that any replacement program regardless of its specific form, as recommended by the President, will not take effect until after the termination dates, he added. No transition period is provided for in changing from the Neighborhood Development Program to revised community development programs. Thus, even if there are replacement programs, considerable community momentum can be lost between the old and the new programs.

Anderson stated that, “Recent pronouncements by the Administration declare that these programs have been disappointing and have failed."

"The St. Paul Housing and Redevelopment Authority maintains that in St. Paul, significant accomplishments characterize the housing and renewal pri gram over the last ten years. During that period the city has undergone major physical revitalization. The HRA has removed over 1.800 blighted, substandard buildings, relocated 2,700 families and individuals, and has provided over 6.100 units of new or rehabilitated housing. Through these programs the agency has made available over $4 million in new recreation buildings and facilities and has made $7 million worth of improvements to the city's streets. is a direct

result of these activities the downtown tax base has increased from $710,000 to $2.2 million in new office buildings, new in-town housing and a modern skyway system. The new Civic Center could only have been achieved through the Federal assistance programs. We have improved the quality of life for our citizens by providing better housing, better shopping, improved amenities and considerable employment opportunities."

Renewal and housing programs have returned $97.5 million of Federal renewal funds to St. Paul over the last ten years. Without this assistance, St. Paul will feel severe effects to programs already in process.

While our primary concern is, of course, the future of NDP in Saint Paul, it should be emphasized that what may happen here will undoubtedly be repeated in communities throughout Minnesota and across the nation. Therefore, it is important to alert the citizens and elected leaders of St. Paul, the officials of our state government, and our national representatives to the need for positive and workable alternatives to the cessation of community development activities.

GEORGE E. HOWELL,
Director, Department of
Planning and Development.

[From the Minneapolis Tribune, Feb. 2, 1973) LOAN FREEZE CHILLS HOPE FOR HOME REPAIRS

HALT IN LOW-INTEREST RENEWAL MONEY RAISES FEAR FOR INNER-CITY HOUSES

Peter and Gerry Hoag bought their not-so-new house a block off Plymouth Av. N. in 1968 mostly out of idealism.

In the past few weeks the fruits of that commitment have turned sour. The Hoags and hundreds of other Minneapolis homeowners have lost an important tool-low-interest loans-in fighting the creeping urban decay around them.

“We had been speaking up for integration in the suburbs and in Appleton, Wis., until finally we realized it was a question of 'put up or shut up, Mrs. Hoag said, explaining the decision to move near the North Side's black concentration.

Also, her 47-year-old husband wanted a bedroom for each of their four teenagers, plus a study for himself and another for her. Hoag found it all in a 6-bedroom home that also boasts a sunporch, fireplace, leaded-glass windows, towering oak and elm trees, and a built-in vacuum cleaning system-that workspatented in 1910.

It's the largest house on Upton Av. N., Hoag says with a trace of pride, but it's also 58 years old. It could stand some repairs.

Thus, the Hoags joined eagerly with their neighbors in asking the City Council for urban renewal in 1970. The Willard-Homewood renewal project was approved with virtually no opposition from residents—an occurrence unique in Minneapolis history.

This is because the Hoags and their neighbors knew that 20-year, 3-percent federal loans would be available to fix up their homes. (Banks charge 9-percent interest and usually insist on more-rapid repayment.) Further, homeowners earning less than $3,000 can get $3,500 outright grants to bring houses up to code specifications.

The Hoags were among the first to sign up for a loan when the initial applications were solicited 18 months ago. All of the money available the first year went to hardship cases-people with leaking roofs and the like.

Last fall the Hoags had their house inspected and discovered they'd need $8,000 worth of repairs—$2,500 for a new roof, the rest for first-floor and basement plumbing, some rewiring, brick tuckpointing and stucco repairs.

Two weeks ago the Hoags learned their loan application had been denied.

The reason: in November the U.S. Office of Management and Budget in Washington froze 75 percent of the $70 million Congress has appropriated for rehabilitation loans. The remainder was earmarked for low-income homeowners. Hoag, who earns an above-average income by buying the premiums for trading-stamp catalogs, earns too much to qualify.

Moreover, with the new freeze on future rehabilitation loans imposed Monday by President Nixon, it is not clear when-if ever-the Hoags will get a 3-percent loan.

« 이전계속 »