Field offices and personnel of Federal Housing Administration, fiscal year 1937, close Nov. 30, 1936—Continued Baltimore, Md. Detroit, Mich. Concord, N. H Newark, N. J. Santa Fe, N. Mex. White Plains, N. Y Oklahoma City, Okla. Tulsa, Okla. Providence, R. I. Columbia, S. C. Sioux Falls, S. Dak. Memphis, Tenn. Dallas, Tex.. 115 $24, 142. 22 1, 141 $4, 505, 040 50, 126, 74 726 15, 202. 13 95, 591.86 1,777 46,789.26 661 278 2,667, 985 838, 410 8,704, 900 1,935,000 72,635.09 1,702 5, 608, 170 31, 160. 06 572 1,740, 290 649.400 923.334 8,036.014 4,668, 600 EXPENSES FOR ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS Mr. WOODRUM. Will you furnish us with a statement about the provision in your item reading, "not to exceed $2,000 for expenses of attendance, when specifically authorized by the Administrator, at meetings concerned with the work of the Administration"? Mr. NICKSON. Yes, sir. (The statement above referred to is as follows:) In regard to the limitation of $2,000 for the travel expenses of employees for the purpose of attending conventions: As you perhaps are aware, in order to accomplish the purposes of the act, it is necessary to carry on considerable educational work. One of the best ways to conduct this activity is to have employees of the Federal Housing Administration attend the conventions of financial bankers and real-estate operators for the purpose of explaining the benefits of the National Housing Act. In this way for a small expense, officials of the Federal Housing Administration make direct contacts with the manufacturers of mortgages and explain the benefits of the act in its relation to their particular problems. The procedure is one of the most effective methods of presenting these problems at the source. The attendance at these meetings is under the direct control of the Administrator, and employees who attend them are designated by him. Only such employees as are considered yell qualified are considered for this work. To be able to attend conventions of this character is considered important and has been productive of very good results at a minimum of expense. RELATION OF F. H. A. TO OTHER GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. You have authority to make loans, do you not, as distinct from insurance, under title I? Mr. NICKSON. Section 3 covers loans, but that has been repealed. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Is there any conflict, in your judgment, or any overlapping between the work of this agency and other Federal agencies in this field? We have a good many agencies in this general field. Is there any conflict or any overlapping? Mr. FERGUSON. I do not think there is any. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. For instance, we have the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. That does not touch your organization? Mr. McDONALD. No; we do business with them. Mr. FERGUSON. That corporation insures shares, just as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insures bank deposits. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. It is work parallel to the work of both of those organizations, but you think there is no conflict. Mr. FERGUSON. No; it is in a different field. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. What about the Home Loan Bank Board system? Mr. McDONALD. They supplement our work; they do not interfere with us. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. What is the chief distinction between the two functions? Mr. McDONALD. The Home Loan Bank Board acts as a rediscount bank for the federalized savings and loan societies, so that if one of those organizations in the district of Washington, loaded with paper, wants some fresh money they can discount their loans with the homeloan bank, and if those mortgages are in particularly good shape they can get a little higher discount. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. In the one instance the bank makes an estimate of credit and takes the risk, and in the other case the Federal Government does that; that is the fundamental distinction, is it not? Mr. FERGUSON. I think the whole thing is distinct. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Assuming that I would like to repair my roof, I can do it either through a loan through the home-loan bank system, or through the Federal Housing Administration system? Mr. FERGUSON. No; that is through the H. O. L. C. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Can I not go to a member of the home-loan bank system and borrow some money, and then does not that bank go to the regional bank and have the note rediscounted? Mr. FERGUSON. No; a building and loan association cannot lend money except on mortgages. Mr. McDONALD. If you had a building loan mortgage you could either go to the home owners' loan or to any bank and have that done through the Federal Housing Administration, but we are winding up that business on April 1. Mr. FERGUSON. As I understand the repair program, the H. O. L. C. is only permitted to make such loans on property on which they have mortgages. Mr. McDONALD. Distressed houses. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Does the RFC Mortgage Co. come into this picture at all? Mr. McDONALD. That supplements us in this respect, that because we have never been able to get title III to properly operate, the RFC Mortgage Co. is now accepting for insurance these large-scale housing projects from us, if they cannot find financing elsewhere. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. That is, they buy the mortgage which you have already insured? Mr. McDONALD. They will make the loan direct and we will insure it. They are doing that in the case of the project at the head of Sixteenth Street right now, making a loan of a million and a quarter. That is on a large-scale project which we have insured, and they make a loan and expect to sell it to some life insurance company, or similar organization. That is done to encourage new construction. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. You do not feel that there is any conflict or overlapping or duplication in any way as between your agency and any other Government agency at this time. Mr. McDONALD. In our activities? Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Yes. Mr. McDONALD. No. But I will say this: You have not asked me the question, but I would say that it would, of course, simplify the operation of all housing activities of the Government if they were grouped together under one head. But that is for you gentlemen in Congress to determine. These various departments are functioning and getting along very well with one another, and not interfering, as far as we are concerned. We do not come in contact with them except through Dr. Fisher's department, and that is the best organized of any statistical department on housing statistics. Dr. FISHER. We exchange data quite frequently. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Has the authority of your activity ever been questioned, from the legal standpoint? Mr. McDONALD. It has not. We have avoided that. Two or three times we have been threatened with that, but we have avoided it. On one of our large-scale housing projects in New York, which was contiguous to surrounding property, the surrounding property owners claimed it was bringing in a class of tenants less desirable than those in the rest of the neighborhood, and they threatened to test the act, and we thought it was best not to go through with the venture, because it would slow up a lot of construction. Mr. FERGUSON. However, our authority has never been questioned, as to the constitutionality of our act. The question has only been raised in one case, in a criminal case in New York, where some man was indicted for fraud under title I, but the court did not decide the case because the man plead guilty, and that took the question out of the case. But the court indicated from the bench that he did not think the constitutionality could be raised because the man had taken all the benefits of the act. That is the only case that we know anything about. The Attorney General has furnished an opinion to the President as to the validity of the act. THURSDAY, JANUARY 7, 1937. PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION STATEMENTS OF EBERT K. BURLEW, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT; HORATIO B. HACKETT, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR; J. J. MADIGAN, EXECUTIVE OFFICER; E. W. CLARK, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT: CHARLES J. MAXCY, CHIEF ACCOUNTANT; FRED E. SCHNEPFE, DIRECTOR, PROJECTS DIVISION; AND DAN H. WHEELER, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, PROJECTS DIVISION Mr. WOODRUM. We will take up this morning the item for the Public Works Administration, which reads as follows: Not to exceed $10,000,000 of the amount of $300,000,000 made available, upon the direction of the President, to the Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works by Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1936 shall be available during the fiscal year 1938 for administrative expenses in connection with the liquidation of said Administration, including personal services in the District of Columbia and elsewhere; travel expenses, in accordance with the Standardized Government Travel Regulations and the Act of June 3, 1926, as amended (U. S. C., title 5, secs. 821-833); printing and binding; law books, books of reference, and not to exceed $500 for periodicals, newspapers, and press clippings; procurement of supplies, equipment, and services; maintenance, repair, and operation of motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles, to be used only for official purposes; typewriters, adding machines, and other labor-saving devices, including their repair and exchange; not to exceed $1,000 for expenses of attendance, when specifically authorized by the Administrator, at meetings concerned with the work of the Administration; rent in the District of Columbia and elsewhere; and all other necessary administrative expenses: Provided, That except for the limitations in amounts hereinbefore specified, and the restrictions in respect to travel expenses, the administrative expenses and other obligations of the Administration shall be incurred, allowed, and paid in accordance with the provisions of Title II of the National Industrial Recovery Act. JUSTIFICATION OF ESTIMATES I presume, before we proceed to a discussion of the details, you desire to have the justification you have submitted inserted in the record. Mr. MADIGAN. Yes; Mr. Chairman. Mr. WOODRUM. That may be inserted in the record at this point. Mr. MADIGAN. I submit the following justification of the estimate for the Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works for 1938: SALARIES AND EXPENSES, FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORKS This appropriation is requested for the purpose of administering that part of the remaining program which is to be carried out during the fiscal year 1938. It is now anticipated that on July 1, 1937, there will be 1,982 projects of all kinds in various stages of completion, the total cost of which is estimated at $878,190,993. All but 35 of these projects are expected to be completed by June 30, 1938. The projects to be completed after that date are some of the largest ones undertaken, the total estimated cost exceeding $180,000,000. Attached will be found a detailed summary of the projects to be completed during the next fiscal year, this compilation indicating the number of projects in each State estimated for completion during each of the four quarters of the fiscal year. It also shows similar information for the first quarter of the fiscal year 1939. |