The title before you does does not concern itself with the temporary or stopgap housing or the converted units. It deals only with permanent war housing other than that built under the United States Housing Act. Chart 31 shows that there is a total of 181,000 of such permanent dwelling units which will be available for disposition. Chart 32 shows a cost of $796,000,000 for these units. These include 74,000 demountable units which are usable as permanent housing, either at the present site, with perhaps some improvements of a relatively minor consequence, or at some other site, which may be in cities or on farms. We anticipate that the largest part of this permanent war housing will be sold for private residential purposes. Where the planning and construction make it feasible, many houses will be sold to people who will become owner-occupants. In the case of the large number of multiple units which are not available for sale on an individual homeownership basis, much of the housing will be sold to private investors for operation as rental housing or to groups of families desiring to own and live in the housing through mutual ownership. There have been indications from a number of localities that the disposition of some permanent war-housing projects to local public agencies for low-rent housing use is regarded as being in the best interest of the community. Some of the reasons why localities have reached such determinations are 1. The projects are urgently needed to rehouse low-income families of servicemen, veterans, or others and enable slum clearance and urban redevelopment to proceed. 2. It is advantageous to the community to use the existing war housing for this purpose, and thus reduce or eliminate the need for new public housing. 3. The sale of the war housing for private residential purposes might have a serious and adverse effect on rental and property values in that particular locality. 4. The sale of the war housing for private residential purposes might cut unreasonably into the market for new construction in that particular locality. On the basis of inquiries received to date, we find that a total of 63 localities have expressed an interest in acquiring such war-housing projects for low-rent housing uses. The actual number of dwelling units involved in these inquiries is approximately 29,000, involving an initial capital cost of about $120,000,000. This does not represent the total amount of permanent war housing that may be requested by the localities, but is merely a statement of the inquiries we have received up to this date. Where the governing bodies of localities and their local housing authorities request the sale of permanent war-housing projects for long-term public housing use, and where the President determines that such disposition is consistent with orderly demobilization, FPHA should be authorized to dispose of such housing to the local housing authorities if the housing is suitable for such use. Title IX of S. 1592 would establish the standards under which the executive branch could dispose of such housing to local public agencies for the same purposes for which Federal aid may be extended to them under other provisions of this bill. 80525 4616A Section 901 states the policy of this title to dispose of permanent war housing and federally owned housing held by FPHA under the United States Housing Act, consistent with postwar housing needs and with preference to families of servicemen and veterans. Section 902 carries out the principle of local initiative and local determination, as the local governing body must take the initiative in seeking the housing for low-rent use. This section provides that permanent war housing may be sold to a local public agency for lowrent housing purposes if (1) the President makes a determintaion that there is no further war need of such housing and that such disposition is consistent with orderly demobilization, and (2) the governing body of the locality finds that such sale would be in the best interests of the community or of the families of servicemen and veterans therein. Upon such determination, the National Housing Administrator may authorize the disposition by FPHA of such war housing for use as lowrent housing, with families of servicemen and veterans having the same preference therein as is described in section 702. Before FPHA would dispose of war housing for such use, it would determine its suitability for the purpose. There are some instances where proposals from localities may have to be rejected by FPHA for the simple reason that the physical properties themselves may present problems of highcost operation which would defeat the very purpose of converting a development to low-rent housing use. The proceeds of the disposition of permanent war housing would be handled in the same manner as is provided in the Lanham Act, which includes provisions relating to the time for covering balances into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. To obtain the maximum return to the Government on its investment in the projects, consistent with their use for low-rent purposes, FPHA would be authorized to sell the projects for a consideration consisting of the payment by the local public agency of all the net revenues from the project during its useful life. Under this provision, the local public agency would be required in each year to pay FPHA an amount representing the difference between the receipts of the local public agency in connection with the project and its expenditures connected therewith, including maintenance, administration, necessary reserves, and other costs. In this way, the Federal Government would be assured of the maximum return which is obtainable from the use of the property for low-rent housing purposes. The sale of projects on these terms would represent the same amount of Federal assistance toward the achievement of low-rent housing as is involved under the system of Federal annual contributions. In both cases, the amount of Federal aid would be strictly limited to the amount necessary to the achievement of low-rent housing purposes. In both cases, any net revenues would be used toward reducing the amount of Federal aid (i) through a return on the investment, in the case of a project sold under this amendment, or (ii) through applying such revenues toward the reduction of future Federal annual contributions, in the case of a local project aided by such Federal annual contributions. The purpose of this title is to add local public agencies to the list of those who could acquire permanent war housing. The saving clause at the end of section 902 is intended to make it clear that this title will not prevent the sale of permanent war housing at its fair value for private residential purposes. This would include not only sales on a home-ownership basis, but also sales to private investors for operation as rental housing or otherwise. Senator MITCHELL. Would that allow that housing to go into use for veterans who are seeking housing at colleges at the present time? Mr. KLUTZNICK. If it is located there. Senator MITCHELL. If it is located at the Mr. KLUTZNICK. Yes, sir. Senator MITCHELL. How about the moving of units from one spot to another? Mr. KLUTZNICK. Senator, this bill has not a thing to do with that. That is done under title V of the Lanham Act. As you undoubtedly know, there was quite a debate in the House yesterday on an appropriation for the purposes of title V. We have moved temporary housing to universities, or better, I should say, we have made it available to universities for purposes of being moved Senator MITCHELL. You have made a study of the cost of moving, too, haven't you, and the cost of Mr. KLUTZNICK. Well, we have had considerable experience, and we know what those costs are generally, but they vary depending upon the houses and the length of the move and the new site. Senator MITCHELL. Have you made any study of panelizing houses? Mr. KLUTZNICK. We have panelized houses; yes. Senator MITCHELL. Is it feasible, under the present demands for housing? Mr. KLUTZNICK. I think so. I won't even qualify it that way. I know it is. We have done it during the war where there was an emergency demand; and if the present demand is an emergency demand-and I take it that it is—it is just as feasible under this emer gency. Senator MITCHELL. Now, by "panelizing" you mean panelizing a constructed house which was not built in panels? Mr. KLUTZNICK. Panelizing a temporary dwelling unit that was not built as a demountable unit. We have panelized such houses and moved them as far as 1,150 miles. Senator MITCHELL. And they have come through in good shape and are doing the job now? Mr. KLUTZNICK. In some instances they were better when they were re-erected on the site than when they were first built. The CHAIRMAN. In this debate did the Appropriations Committee cut out? Mr. KLUTZNICK. Yes; that was the $24,500,000 that the Appropriations Committee recommended against. It was inserted last night. Senator MITCHELL. That is back in the bill now. Mr. KLUTZNICK. It is back in the bill as of last night. There may have been a roll call today. I don't know. The CHAIRMAN. It is very much needed, isn't it? Mr. KLUTZNICK. Sir, we have on an average of 10 to 12 calls a day, and one day we had up to 57, from Congressmen, Senators, colleges, towns that are just desperate. The CHAIRMAN. For houses? Mr. KLUTZNICK. Now, if it Senator MITCHELL. Have you made any tabulation of college needs? Mr. KLUTZNICK. I understand that you will get some information of that kind before you in later testimony. Our procedure up to now has been to try to put out the fires as they were presented to us, and that is about all we have been able to do, and that not too well, under the limitations. Mr. Chairman, I have a brief statement here that will take a minute and a half, that I should like to include in the record. The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Mr. KLUTZNICK. And then I will be finished. The CHAIRMAN. Fine. Mr. KLUTZNICK My statement has concerned itself exclusively with the portions of the bill that are intimately related to the work of the Federal Public Housing Authority. I trust that the committee will not deem it inappropriate for me to make a few broad general observations with reference to the bill in its entirety. The legislation you are presently considering is certainly the result of earnest and detailed study by your sponsoring colleagues and is the product of the best thinking in the housing field. It does not achieve perfection; no such document dealing with a diverse and complex set of economic and social motivations can be expected to attain such stature. could disagree with some details, essentially minor to the main proposals. However, apart from such matters, I believe the bill to represent a historic step forward in Federal legislation. I Drawing on such experience as I have enjoyed in this field, I would wholeheartedly endorse its purposes for several important reasons: 1. It recognizes the primacy of the obligation and the responsibility of private industry to conceive and execute a housing program of such magnitude as to reach tremendous areas of heretofore untouched need. As such, it will meet an urgent social and economic objective and open the avenues to a greater housing industry with desirable benefits in store for both capital and labor. 2. It realistically plots the area of public housing activity with courageous validation of the desirability of such a function and yet, with appropriate restraint as to the use of this medium. 3. It recognizes that a coherent national housing policy cannot be administered in disconnected fashion. The establishment of a single agency to execute a single program is good business. It should make for greater accomplishments. The gravity of the current housing situation transcends anything we have witnessed in contemporary times. Congested and depressed housing conditions are a rule in most localities. At best the alleviation of these conditions will take several years. During this time. our people need the comfort of some hope that relief is on the way. This measure is that hope. In what it will accomplish, it will be responsive to a great and urgent national need. I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, for your kindness. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you; are there any further questions? (No response.) |